Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31089755›Full record

ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2019

[Differentiated surgical treatment of male stress urinary incontinence-between intention and reality?]

S Mühlstädt, T Hüsch, R M Bauer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Frontiers in surgery · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

S MühlstädtUniversitätsklinik für Urologie und Nierentransplantation Martin-Luther-Universität, Ernst-Grube-Straße 40, 06120, Halle / Saale, Deutschland. sandra.muehlstaedt@uk-halle.de.
T HüschKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, Mainz, Deutschland.
R M BauerUrologische Klinik und Poliklinik der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Campus Großhadern, München, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The differentiated surgical treatment of male urinary incontinence is a very interesting and sometimes also emotional topic, in which evidence is increasingly maturing. Nowadays, the most common surgical procedures are fixed sling and adjustable incontinence systems as well as the artificial urinary sphincter. The evidence for the procedures varies and there is currently a lack of prospective, comparative studies. The challenging question is: Which operation is the best for which patient? The following article is intended to give an overview of the surgical options and a constructive attempt to differentiate the indication.

Indexed as

Prostheses and ImplantsSuburethral SlingsUrinary Sphincter, ArtificialHumansIntentionMalePostoperative ComplicationsProstatectomyTreatment OutcomeUrinary Incontinence, StressUrologic Surgical ProceduresUrologic Surgical Procedures, MaleArtificial implantArtificial urinary sphincterBladderMicturitionSling

Identifiers

PMID31089755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.