Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31853594›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2020

The safety and efficacy of CO

Hanin Dabaja, Roy Lauterbach, Emad Matanes, Ilan Gruenwald, Lior Lowenstein

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urogynecology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Fractional COInternational urogynecology journal · 2023
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. The Long-Term Effectiveness of Fractional COInternational urogynecology journal · 2026
    Article
  6. Fractional COInternational urogynecology journal · 2026
    Article
  7. Short-Term Superiority of Transvaginal COInternational journal of women's health · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Effect of lattice COWorld journal of psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Pixel-COLasers in medical science · 2022
    Article
  14. COTherapeutic advances in urology
    Review
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

5 authors.

Hanin Dabaja *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rambam Health Care Campus, and Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
Roy Lauterbach *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rambam Health Care Campus, and Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel. r_lauterbach@rambam.health.gov.il.
Emad MatanesDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rambam Health Care Campus, and Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
Ilan GruenwaldDepartment of Neuro-Urology, Rambam Health Care Campus, and Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel.
Lior LowensteinDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rambam Health Care Campus, and Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisConservative treatment is recommended as first-line therapy for stress urinary incontinence (SUI). We hypothesized that CO

methodsA prospective, open-label, cohort study of 33 women (mean age 43 years) referred from a continence clinic after urologist/urogynecologist assessment, with a verified stress urinary incontinence diagnosis based on urodynamic testing. The participants completed three outpatient treatments with laser therapy and were subsequently evaluated at 1, 3 and 6 months. The independent t and chi-square tests were used to assess changes in sanitary pad usage and SUI symptoms.

resultsSanitary pad usage decreased from a median of 12 per day at baseline to 7 at 1-3 months post-treatment (P < 0.0001) and returned to 12 at 6 months post-treatment. Scores on the Urogenital Distress Inventory and the International Consultation of Incontinence Questionnaire decreased (improved) significantly at 1-3 months post-treatment: from 45 ± 2 and 16 ± 4, respectively, to 29.3 ± 14.7 and 8.15 ± 3.1, respectively (P < 0.0001). The scores returned to levels similar to baseline at 6 months after treatment. Participants reported mild and transient side effects, with significant improvement in quality of life.

conclusionsLaser therapy can be an optional conservative treatment for women who seek minimally invasive non-surgical treatment for the management of SUI. No serious adverse effects were reported though the sample size was not large, a possible limitation of the study. Further large randomized control trials are needed to appraise the efficacy and safety of laser therapy for stress urinary incontinence and to demonstrate the ultimate utility of this modality.

Indexed as

Lasers, GasUrinary Incontinence, StressAdultCarbon DioxideCohort StudiesFemaleHumansProspective StudiesQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeCarbon DioxideEfficacyLaser therapySafetyStress urinary incontinence

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.