ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Topical hyaluronic acid and oxygen for urinary incontinence: a double-center retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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.
- Post-Hysterectomy Vaginal Vault Prolapse: Current Perspectives and Decision-Making Considerations for Surgical Treatment.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of low-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid (LMWHA) solution and high-concentration oxygen (HCO) through a specific medical device (Caress Flow©), compared to topical administration of hyaluronic acid (HA) alone, on symptoms of mild and moderate stress and mixed urinary incontinence in women with genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM). Methods: A total of 68 postmenopausal women were registered (from October 2021 to September 2023). Patients were divided into two groups: one group received therapy with LMWHA solution and HCO combined, and the second group received HA therapy alone. The primary outcome was the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). Secondary outcomes included the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-short form (ICIQ-SF) questionnaire and the International Quality of Life (IQoL) questionnaire. Results: Of the 68 women, 35 (51%) and 33 (49%) were treated with LMWHA solution and HCO combined and HA alone for 10 weeks, respectively. A total of 28 (80%) vs. 7 (21%) women reported an improvement (PGI-I score ≤3) of the symptoms in the LMWHA solution and HCO combined group vs. the HA alone group. According to the ICIQ-SF, a statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups after treatment (median, 7 [5-11] vs. 10 [8-11]; Conclusion: LMWHA solution and HCO combined might improve mild and moderate stress and mixed urinary incontinence in women with GSM and appear superior to HA therapy alone. However, these results need to be confirmed in further studies with a controlled design and a larger population.
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.