Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31111191›Full record

ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2019

[Ins and outs in the surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence].

C Hampel

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

C HampelFachklinik für Urologie am Marienhospital Erwitte, Betriebsstätte der Dreifaltigkeits-Hospital gGmbH, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Von-Droste-Str. 14, 59597, Erwitte, Deutschland. christian.hampel@dreifaltigkeits-hospital.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proper indication, preoperative diagnostics and final choice of surgical technique in the operative management of female stress urinary incontinence are subject to somewhat irrational, trend-based changes. For various reasons (insufficient reimbursement, poor expertise, limited therapeutic spectrum) preoperative urodynamic tests are increasingly thought to be unnecessary and are progressively replaced by perineal ultrasound despite lack of evidence. Since the AWMF guidelines (AWMF: Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany) for the diagnosis and treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women were published, individualized planning of therapy is "out". Unconditional guideline adherence in certified pelvic floor centers, which have become very popular in Germany, has furthermore restricted the spread of therapeutic options due to minimum procedure number requirements. With regard to suburethral tension-free alloplastic slings, the retropubic version, which was temporarily unfashionable, has been experiencing a renaissance at the cost of the transobturator alternative. Single-incision slings were developed for the outpatient US market and have never become established in Germany due to lack of proof of superiority. In the setting of a limited spectrum of surgical procedures, adjustable sling systems offer promising treatment options for risk groups with acceptance of higher infection and erosion rates, thus gaining popularity. Reliable and comprehensive preoperative patient information comprising the whole spectrum of therapeutic options with individual risks and opportunities is key to prevent the impending ban of alloplastic implants in female stress incontinence surgery.

Indexed as

Suburethral SlingsUltrasonographyFemaleGermanyHumansPelvic FloorRisk FactorsUrinary IncontinenceUrinary Incontinence, StressUrodynamicsUrologic Surgical ProceduresGuidelinesSuburethral slingsTension free vaginal tapeUltrasoundUrodynamics

Identifiers

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.