↓ Skip to main content

Meta-analysis of female stress urinary incontinence treatments with adjustable single-incision mini-slings and transobturator tension-free vaginal tape surgeries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Urology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Meta-analysis of female stress urinary incontinence treatments with adjustable single-incision mini-slings and transobturator tension-free vaginal tape surgeries
Published in
BMC Urology, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12894-015-0060-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peng Zhang, Bohan Fan, Peng Zhang, Hu Han, Yue Xu, Biao Wang, Xiaodong Zhang

Abstract

The study on SIMS and SMUS as a whole by Alyaa Mostafa et al showed that after excluding the TVT-S sling, there is no significant difference in patient-reported cure rate and objective cure rate between these two methods. In this paper, we systematically evaluate the relevant data on SIMS-Ajust and TVT-O/TOT and further confirm their safety and effectiveness, providing reliable clinical evidence. By searching the Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews combined with manual searches, all reports on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of single-incision mini-sling (SIMS-Ajust) and transobturator tension-free vaginal tape (TVT-O/TOT) surgeries were collected. Using RevMan 5.2 statistical software, the patient-reported cure rate, objective cure rate, operative time, postoperative pain, lower urinary tract injuries, groin pain, postoperative voiding difficulties, de novo urgency and/or worsening of preexisting surgery, vaginal tape erosion, repeated continence surgery, and other related data on both surgical methods were evaluated. A total of 154 relevant research reports were retrieved, and five randomized controlled trials were included in this study, involving a total of 678 patients. The meta-analysis results show no significant difference in the patient-reported cure rate and objective cure rate between SIMS-Ajust and TVT-O/TOT [RR = 0.95, 95 % CI (0.87 to 1.04), P > 0.05; RR = 0.97, 95 % CI (0.90-1.05), P > 0.05]. With respect to operation time and groin pain, SIMS-Ajust outperforms TVT-O/TOT [MD = -1.61, 95 % CI (-2.48 to 0.74), P < 0.05; RR = 0.30, 95 % CI (0.11 to 0.85), P < 0.05]. In terms of postoperative pain, lower urinary tract injuries, postoperative voiding difficulties, de novo urgency and/or worsening of preexisting surgery, vaginal tape erosion, and repetition of continence surgery, there is no significant difference between SIMS-Ajust and TVT-O/TOT [RR = 0.50, 95 % CI(0.18-1.43), P > 0.05; RR = 2.82, 95 % CI(0.14-57.76), P > 0.05; RR = 0.64, 95 % CI(0.28-1.45), P > 0.05; RR = 1.06, 95 % CI(0.66-1.71), P > 0.05; RR = 1.04, 95 % CI(0.24-4.45), P > 0.05; RR = 1.64, 95 % CI(0.41-6.61), P > 0.05]. SIMS-Ajust is safe and effective in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. Compared with TVT-O/TOT surgery, SIMS-Ajust surgery has the same high objective cure rate and patient-reported cure rate and low incidence of perioperative complications, in addition to its short operative time and low incidence of groin pain. Its long-term efficacy needs further observation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Student > Master 12 12%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 7 7%
Other 23 23%
Unknown 25 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Sports and Recreations 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2015.
All research outputs
#7,463,181
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from BMC Urology
#253
of 750 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,882
of 262,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Urology
#8
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 750 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.