Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35922823›Full record

Trial reportTrials2022

Proper understanding of recurrent stress urinary incontinence treatment in women (PURSUIT): a randomised controlled trial of endoscopic and surgical treatment.

L Clark, B Fitzgerald, S Noble, S MacNeill, S Paramasivan, N Cotterill, H Hashim, S Jha, P Toozs-Hobson, T Greenwell and 13 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2022. 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
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Trends in navigation-handheld systems].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  2. 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

23 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

L ClarkDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
B FitzgeraldDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
S NobleDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
S MacNeillDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
S ParamasivanDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
N CotterillBristol Urological Institute, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
H HashimBristol Urological Institute, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
S JhaDepartment of Urogynaecology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Jessop Wing, Tree Root Walk, Sheffield, UK.
P Toozs-HobsonDepartment of Urogynaecology, Birmingham Women's & Children's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
T GreenwellDepartment of Urology, University College London Hospital, London, UK.
N ThiruchelvamDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.
W AgurDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, NHS Ayrshire and Arran, University Hospital Crosshouse, Kilmarnock, UK.
A WhitePatient and Public Involvement (PPI) Representative, Bristol, UK.
V GarnerBristol Urological Institute, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
M Cobos-ArrivabeneBristol Urological Institute, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
C ClementBristol Trials Centre (BTC), University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
M CochraneDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Y LiuDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
A L LewisDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
J TaylorDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
J A LaneDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
M J DrakeBristol Urological Institute, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK. marcus.drake@bristol.ac.uk.
C PopeDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7856-6042
University of Bristol · GBNorth Bristol NHS Trust · GBAt Bristol · GBBirmingham Women’s and Children’s NHS Foundation Trust · GBCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBJessop Hospital · GBNHS Ayrshire and Arran · GBUniversity College Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) experience urine leakage with physical activity. Currently, the interventional treatments for SUI are surgical, or endoscopic bulking injection(s). However, these procedures are not always successful, and symptoms can persist or come back after treatment, categorised as recurrent SUI. There are longstanding symptoms and distress associated with a failed primary treatment, and currently, there is no consensus on how best to treat women with recurrent, or persistent, SUI.

methodsA two-arm trial, set in at least 20 National Health Service (NHS) urology and urogynaecology referral units in the UK, randomising 250 adult women with recurrent or persistent SUI 1:1 to receive either an endoscopic intervention (endoscopic bulking injections) or a standard NHS surgical intervention, currently colposuspension, autologous fascial sling or artificial urinary sphincter. The aim of the trial is to determine whether surgical treatment is superior to endoscopic bulking injections in terms of symptom severity at 1 year after randomisation. This primary outcome will be measured using the patient-reported International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Urinary Incontinence - Short Form (ICIQ-UI-SF). Secondary outcomes include assessment of longer-term clinical impact, improvement of symptoms, safety, operative assessments, sexual function, cost-effectiveness and an evaluation of patients' and clinicians' views and experiences of the interventions. DISCUSSION: There is a lack of high-quality, randomised, scientific evidence for which treatment is best for women presenting with recurrent SUI. The PURSUIT study will benefit healthcare professionals and patients and provide robust evidence to guide further treatment and improve symptoms and quality of life for women with this condition.

trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number (ISRCTN) registry ISRCTN12201059. Registered on 09 January 2020.

Indexed as

Urinary IncontinenceUrinary Incontinence, StressUrinary Sphincter, ArtificialAdultFemaleHumansQuality of LifeState MedicineTreatment OutcomeArtificial urinary sphincterAutologous fascial slingColposuspensionEndoscopic bulking injectionsInternational Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire – Urinary Incontinence – Short Form (ICIQ-UI-SF)PURSUITQualitativeRandomised controlled trialRecurrent stress urinary incontinenceSurgery

Identifiers

PMID35922823
PMCPMC9347071
OpenAlexW4289517644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.