The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence is a very common and debilitating problem affecting about 50% of women at some point in their lives. Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a contributory or predominant cause in 30% to 80% of these women. Mid-urethral sling (MUS) operations are a recognised minimally invasive surgical treatment for SUI. MUS involves the passage of a small strip of tape through either the retropubic or obturator space, with entry or exit points at the lower abdomen or groin, respectively. This review does not include single incision slings. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effects of mid-urethral sling (MUS) operations for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI), urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) or mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) in women. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 26 June 2014), Embase and Embase Classic (January 1947 to Week 25 2014), WHO ICTRP (searched on 30 June 2014) and the reference lists of relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials amongst women with SUI, USI or MUI, in which both trial arms involve a MUS operation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of potentially eligible studies and extracted data from the included trials. MAIN RESULTS: We included 81 trials that evaluated 12,113 women. We assessed the quality of evidence for outcomes using the GRADE assessment tool; the quality of most outcomes was moderate, mainly due to risk of bias or imprecision.Fifty-five trials with data contributed by 8652 women compared the use of the transobturator route (TOR) and retropubic route (RPR). There is moderate quality evidence that in the short term (up to one year) the rate of subjective cure of TOR and RPR are similar (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.00; 36 trials, 5514 women; moderate quality evidence) ranging from 62% to 98% in the TOR group, and from 71% to 97% in the RPR group. Short-term objective cure was similar in the TOR and RPR groups (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.00; 40 trials, 6145 women). Fewer trials reported medium-term (one to five years) and longer-term (over five years) data, but subjective cure was similar between the groups (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.09; 5 trials, 683 women; low quality evidence; and RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.12; 4 trials, 714 women; moderate quality evidence, respectively). In the long term, subjective cure rates ranged from 43% to 92% in the TOR group, and from 51% to 88% in the RPR group.MUS procedures performed using the RPR had higher morbidity when compared to TOR, though the overall rate of adverse events remained low. The rate of bladder perforation was lower after TOR (0.6% versus 4.5%; RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.20; 40 trials, 6372 women; moderate quality evidence). Major vascular/visceral injury, mean operating time, operative blood loss and length of hospital stay were lower with TOR.Postoperative voiding dysfunction was less frequent following TOR (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.65; 37 trials, 6200 women; moderate quality evidence). Overall rates of groin pain were higher in the TOR group (6.4% versus 1.3%; RR 4.12, 95% CI 2.71 to 6.27; 18 trials, 3221 women; moderate quality evidence) whereas suprapubic pain was lower in the TOR group (0.8% versus 2.9%; RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.78); both being of short duration. The overall rate of vaginal tape erosion/exposure/extrusion was low in both groups: 24/1000 instances with TOR compared with 21/1000 for RPR (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.65; 31 trials, 4743 women; moderate quality evidence). There were only limited data to inform the need for repeat incontinence surgery in the long term, but it was more likely in the TOR group than in the RPR group (RR 8.79, 95% CI 3.36 to 23.00; 4 trials, 695 women; low quality evidence).A retropubic bottom-to-top route was more effective than top-to-bottom route for subjective cure (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.19; 3 trials, 477 women; moderate quality evidence). It incurred significantly less voiding dysfunction, and led to fewer bladder perforations and vaginal tape erosions.Short-and medium-term subjective cure rates between transobturator tapes passed using a medial-to-lateral as opposed to a lateral-to-medial approach were similar (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.06; 6 trials, 759 women; moderate quality evidence, and RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.23; 2 trials, 235 women; moderate quality evidence). There was moderate quality evidence that voiding dysfunction was more frequent in the medial-to-lateral group (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.88; 8 trials, 1121 women; moderate quality evidence), but vaginal perforation was less frequent in the medial-to-lateral route (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.53; 3 trials, 541 women). Due to the very low quality of the evid
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
GRADE guidelines: a new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Schünemann, H. J., Tugwell, P., & Knottnerus, A. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.011 · Cited by 3,094
Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2001) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-1-2 · Cited by 2,755
CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., & for the CONSORT Group (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000251 · Cited by 2,296
GRADE guidelines: 9. Rating up the quality of evidence
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Sultan, S., Glasziou, P., Akl, E. A., Alonso-Coello, P., Atkins, D., Kunz, R., Brozek, J., Montori, V., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.06.004 · Cited by 1,336
GRADE guidelines: 13. Preparing Summary of Findings tables and evidence profiles—continuous outcomes
Guyatt, G. H., Thorlund, K., Oxman, A. D., Walter, S. D., Patrick, D., Furukawa, T. A., Johnston, B. C., Karanicolas, P., Akl, E. A., Vist, G., et al. (2013) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.08.001 · Cited by 772
A Midurethral Sling to Reduce Incontinence after Vaginal Prolapse Repair
Wei, J. T., Nygaard, I., Richter, H. E., Nager, C. W., Barber, M. D., Kenton, K., Amundsen, C. L., Schaffer, J., Meikle, S. F., & Spino, C. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1111967 · Cited by 339
Assessing and presenting summaries of evidence in Cochrane Reviews
Langendam, M. W., Akl, E. A., Dahm, P., Glasziou, P., Guyatt, G., & Schünemann, H. J. (2013) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-2-81 · Cited by 282
Cited by
Surgical Treatment of Female Stress Urinary Incontinence: AUA/SUFU Guideline
Kobashi, K. C., Albo, M. E., Dmochowski, R. R., Ginsberg, D. A., Goldman, H. B., Gomelsky, A., Kraus, S. R., Sandhu, J. S., Shepler, T., Treadwell, J. R., et al. (2017) · Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2017.06.061 · Cited by 346
Transvaginal mesh or grafts compared with native tissue repair for vaginal prolapse
Maher, C., Feiner, B., Baessler, K., Christmann-Schmid, C., Haya, N., & Marjoribanks, J. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012079 · Cited by 344
Surgery for women with anterior compartment prolapse
Maher, C., Feiner, B., Baessler, K., Christmann-Schmid, C., Haya, N., & Brown, J. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004014.pub6 · Cited by 266
Metadata
- Authors
- Ford, A. A., Rogerson, L., Cody, J. D., & Ogah, J.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
- Published
- 2015-07-01
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- CD006375-CD006375
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4250630073
- Cited by
- 309
- References
- 7
- Type
- reference entry
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd006375.pub3
- The paper
- Ford, A. A., Rogerson, L., Cody, J. D., & Ogah, J. (2015). Mid-urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd006375.pub3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.