-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Safety and Efficacy of Single Incision Sling Versus Midurethral Sling in the Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Randomized Controlled Trial
M. Huser, R. Hudecek, I. Belkov, I. Horvath, J. Jarkovsky, S. Tvarozek
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu hodnocení ekvivalence, časopisecké články, randomizované kontrolované studie
- MeSH
- inkontinence moči * chirurgie MeSH
- kvalita života MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- stresová inkontinence moči * chirurgie MeSH
- suburetrální pásky * škodlivé účinky MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- hodnocení ekvivalence MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
IMPORTANCE: This study compares the long-term efficacy and safety of an innovative single-incision sling (SIS) with the inside-out transobturator tape (TOT) sling in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. OBJECTIVES: Women with urodynamic stress urinary incontinence were randomized to either SIS or TOT groups and followed up for 4 years. The primary outcome was objective cure defined with a negative cough stress test result. Secondary outcomes involved subjective cure reported via patient's satisfaction scale, surgery complications, postoperative de novo urgency, and patient's life quality. STUDY DESIGN: This is a randomized noninferiority controlled trial. RESULTS: A total of 168 women were randomized (84 in both groups). After 4-year follow-up, 130 patients were analyzed (66 in the SIS group and 64 in the TOT group). The objective (86.4% vs 84.4%; risk difference [95% confidence interval], 0.020 [-0.101 to 0.141]; P = 0.807) and subjective cure rates (83.3% vs 81.3%; risk difference [95% confidence interval], 0.020 [-0.111 to 0.151]; P = 0.821) were similar with the SIS and TOT groups. Both procedures were associated with low complication rates. Repeated surgery rates were 7.6% in the SIS group and 6.3% in the TOT groups. The mesh exposure rate was 1.5% for the SIS group and 3.1% for the TOT group. Incidence of de novo urgency did not vary between TOT and SIS patients. Both groups registered significant life quality improvement. CONCLUSION: After long-term follow-up, anti-incontinence SIS surgery proved noninferior to the inside-out TOT procedure in terms of objective and subjective cure rates.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Brno University Hospital
Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses Masaryk University Medical School Brno Czech Republic
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc23004286
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20230427140310.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 230418s2023 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1097/SPV.0000000000001284 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)36735422
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Huser, Martin
- 245 10
- $a Safety and Efficacy of Single Incision Sling Versus Midurethral Sling in the Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Randomized Controlled Trial / $c M. Huser, R. Hudecek, I. Belkov, I. Horvath, J. Jarkovsky, S. Tvarozek
- 520 9_
- $a IMPORTANCE: This study compares the long-term efficacy and safety of an innovative single-incision sling (SIS) with the inside-out transobturator tape (TOT) sling in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. OBJECTIVES: Women with urodynamic stress urinary incontinence were randomized to either SIS or TOT groups and followed up for 4 years. The primary outcome was objective cure defined with a negative cough stress test result. Secondary outcomes involved subjective cure reported via patient's satisfaction scale, surgery complications, postoperative de novo urgency, and patient's life quality. STUDY DESIGN: This is a randomized noninferiority controlled trial. RESULTS: A total of 168 women were randomized (84 in both groups). After 4-year follow-up, 130 patients were analyzed (66 in the SIS group and 64 in the TOT group). The objective (86.4% vs 84.4%; risk difference [95% confidence interval], 0.020 [-0.101 to 0.141]; P = 0.807) and subjective cure rates (83.3% vs 81.3%; risk difference [95% confidence interval], 0.020 [-0.111 to 0.151]; P = 0.821) were similar with the SIS and TOT groups. Both procedures were associated with low complication rates. Repeated surgery rates were 7.6% in the SIS group and 6.3% in the TOT groups. The mesh exposure rate was 1.5% for the SIS group and 3.1% for the TOT group. Incidence of de novo urgency did not vary between TOT and SIS patients. Both groups registered significant life quality improvement. CONCLUSION: After long-term follow-up, anti-incontinence SIS surgery proved noninferior to the inside-out TOT procedure in terms of objective and subjective cure rates.
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a kvalita života $7 D011788
- 650 12
- $a suburetrální pásky $x škodlivé účinky $7 D053825
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 650 12
- $a inkontinence moči $x chirurgie $7 D014549
- 650 12
- $a stresová inkontinence moči $x chirurgie $7 D014550
- 655 _2
- $a hodnocení ekvivalence $7 D000073843
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
- 700 1_
- $a Hudecek, Robert
- 700 1_
- $a Belkov, Ivan
- 700 1_
- $a Horvath, Ivan $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
- 700 1_
- $a Jarkovsky, Jiri $u Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Masaryk University Medical School, Brno, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Tvarozek, Samuel $u From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brno University Hospital
- 773 0_
- $w MED00210814 $t Urogynecology $x 2771-1897 $g Roč. 29, č. 2 (2023), s. 113-120
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36735422 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20230418 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20230427140304 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1924763 $s 1190495
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2023 $b 29 $c 2 $d 113-120 $e 2023Feb01 $i 2771-1897 $m Urogynecology $n Urogynecology (Phila) $x MED00210814
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20230418