ArticleCurrent urology2021
Transvaginal subfascial synthetic sling - "A novel technique" versus trans-obturator mid-urethral sling in female stress urinary incontinence: A comparative study.
Article in Current urology, 2021. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of the Sub-Urethral Transobturator KIM SystemJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the treatment outcome and overall efficacy of the novel technique of a MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 206 female SUI patients managed at our institution between March 2015 and December 2019. The patients were randomly distributed into 2 comparable groups (Group A as TOT-O and Group B as TVSS) with respect to age, trouble due to SUI assessed with respect to degree of incontinence (number of episodes and diapers used per day), and body mass index (≤40 kg/m
resultsSymptomatic improvement after the procedure was seen in all patients with complete resolution of symptoms in 91 patients (91.%) in the TOT-O group (group A) versus 96 patients (90.56%) in the TVSS (group B). Postoperative complications included urinary retention in 6% versus 5.6%, increased day time urinary frequency in 8% versus 6.6%, urge incontinence in 4% versus 2.8%, and groin/thigh pain in 12% versus 0.9%, respectively. Mesh incision was done in 1 (1%) versus none (0%), and local mesh excision for mesh erosion in 2 (2%) versus 1 (0.9%) at 3 months after the procedure in the TOT-O group and the TVSS group, respectively. The
conclusionsThe
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.