Retropubic bottom‐to‐top approach vs retropubic top‐to‐bottom approach: Denovo urgency or urgency incontinence
Retropubic bottom‐to‐top approach showed no clear difference in de novo urgency or urgency incontinence compared with retropubic top‐to‐bottom approach (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Retropubic bottom‐to‐top approach vs retropubic top‐to‐bottom approach De novo urgency or urgency incontinence · women with stress urinary incontinence Retropubic bottom‐to‐top approach showed no clear difference in de novo urgency or urgency incontinence compared with retropubic top‐to‐bottom approach (low certainty). Mid‐urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.84 [0.52, 1.34] | 4 studies · 547 participants | Low |
Retropubic bottom‐to‐top approach vs retropubic top‐to‐bottom approach De novo urgency or urgency incontinence · women with stress urinary incontinence Retropubic bottom‐to‐top approach showed no clear difference in de novo urgency or urgency incontinence compared with retropubic top‐to‐bottom approach (low certainty). Mid‐urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women (2015) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD006375.PUB3, superseded | RR 0.84 [0.52, 1.34] | 4 studies · 547 participants | Low |
Retropubic bottom‐to‐top approach vs retropubic top‐to‐bottom approach Denovo urgency or urgency incontinence · patients with stress urinary incontinence in women Retropubic bottom‐to‐top approach showed no clear difference in denovo urgency or urgency incontinence compared with retropubic top‐to‐bottom approach (moderate certainty). Mid‐urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women (2009) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD006375.PUB2, superseded | RR 0.84 [0.52, 1.34] | 4 studies · 547 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mid‐urethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.