ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2019
[Ins and outs in the surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence].
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Management of complications in reconstructive pelvic floor surgery].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
31111191What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.