ArticleJournal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association2025
Comparison of laparoscopic and laparotomic Burch colposuspension in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence.
Article in Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association, 2025. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate patients who underwent Burch colposuspension due to stress-type urinary incontinence (SUI) in terms of laparoscopic (L/S) and laparotomy (L/T) approaches. Material and Methods: Women aged 40-70 years who were admitted to our hospital with symptoms of SUI between 2017 and 2024, who underwent surgical treatment for SUI, and who met the inclusion criteria were included. The women were divided into two groups, those who received L/T and those who underwent L/S Burch colposuspension. To assess the impact of SUI on quality of life, several quality-of-life questionnaires, including the urinary distress inventory (UDI-6), the incontinence impact questionnaire (IIQ-7), the short-form-36 (SF-36) physical component summary, and the mental component summary (MCS), were evaluated. Post-operative pain was assessed with a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Results: The cohort consisted of 74 patients. The surgical time and estimated blood loss in the L/S group was significantly lower than in the L/T group (both p<0.001). The sixth and 48 Conclusion: In our study, the results of Burch colposuspension methods were consistent with the literature. L/S-Burch colposuspension is superior in terms of surgical time, blood loss, hospital stay, pain management, and recovery time. The significant decrease in UDI-6 and IIQ-7 scores at the 6-month follow-up shows that both methods provide improvement in urinary incontinence symptoms and increase quality of life.
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.