ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Multiple Endoclip Retraction Technique (MERT) in Laparoscopic Burch.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: The multiple endoclip retraction technique (MERT) was developed based on our experience with suturing renal parenchyma in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. In this study we prospectively evaluated the one-year results of cases treated by transperitoneal laparoscopic Burch with the MERT. Methods: The patients were evaluated with stress test, one-hour pad test, and were requested to complete the International Continence Society Incontinence Questionnaire short form (ICIQ-SF) in the postoperative period. The follow-up periods were postoperative 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: The primary outcome of this study was surgical success, defined as being cured of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) (no symptoms), experiencing improved symptoms of SUI in ICIQ-SF and negative stress test, and less than 2g urine leakage in a one-hour pad test.No statistically significant difference was found in terms of age, number of children, and body mass index (BMI) in patients according to the results of the 12 month postoperative stress test. We found statistically significant improvements at all control months in terms of stress test and pad weight. ICIQ-SF results showed a significant decrease at three months in patients who recovered after the operation. This rate has not changed in following control months. However, there was no statistical change in ICIQ-SF values in patients who did not recover after the operation. Conclusion: MERT seems to be one of the safe and effective modifications in the management of SUI with good one year outcomes when performed by suitably trained experienced surgeons.
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.