Cochrane · systematic review · CD002239
Laparoscopic colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women
Freites, J, Stewart, F, Omar, MI, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library
IncontinenceAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
30
current version
GRADE rated
20
No studies
7
Included studies
NR
No studies 7 · 23.3%Ungraded 3 · 10%Very low 3 · 10%Low 12 · 40%Moderate 4 · 13.3%High 1 · 3.3%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Laparoscopic colposuspension compared to open colposuspension for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Subjective cure within 18 months: laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures Laparoscopic colposuspension vs open colposuspension | RR 1.04 [0.99, 1.08] | 6 studies · 755 participants | High |
Subjective cure within 18 months: laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh and staples Laparoscopic colposuspension vs open colposuspension | RR 0.75 [0.61, 0.93] | 3 studies · 362 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Quality of life Laparoscopic colposuspension vs open colposuspension | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 742 participants | Ungraded |
Repeat continence surgery: Laparoscopic colposuspension vs open colposuspension | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Ungraded |
Adverse effects: perioperative complications (number of events) Laparoscopic colposuspension vs open colposuspension | RR 0.67 [0.47, 0.94] | 11 studies · 1369 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Adverse effects: bladder perforations Laparoscopic colposuspension vs open colposuspension | RR 1.72 [0.9, 3.29] | 10 studies · 1311 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Adverse effects: de novo detrusor overactivity (urodynamic diagnosis) Laparoscopic colposuspension vs open colposuspension | RR 1.29 [0.72, 2.3] | 5 studies · 472 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Adverse effects: voiding dysfunction Laparoscopic colposuspension vs open colposuspension | RR 0.81 [0.5, 1.31] | 5 studies · 507 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Laparoscopic colposuspension compared to midurethral sling procedures for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Subjective cure within 18 months: laparoscopic colposuspension using sutures versus TVT Laparoscopic colposuspension vs midurethral sling procedures | RR 1.01 [0.88, 1.16] | 4 studies · 256 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Subjective cure within 18 months: laparoscopic colposuspension using mesh versus TVT Laparoscopic colposuspension vs midurethral sling procedures | RR 0.71 [0.55, 0.91] | 1 study · 121 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Quality of life Laparoscopic colposuspension vs midurethral sling procedures | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 385 participants | Ungraded |
Repeat continence surgery: Laparoscopic colposuspension vs midurethral sling procedures | RR 0.4 [0.04, 3.62] | 1 study · 70 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Adverse effects: perioperative complications (number of events) Laparoscopic colposuspension vs midurethral sling procedures | RR 0.99 [0.6, 1.64] | 7 studies · 514 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse effects: bladder perforations Laparoscopic colposuspension vs midurethral sling procedures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse effects: de novo detrusor overactivity (urodynamic diagnosis) Laparoscopic colposuspension vs midurethral sling procedures | RR 0.8 [0.34, 1.88] | 4 studies · 326 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse effects: voiding dysfunction Laparoscopic colposuspension vs midurethral sling procedures | RR 1.06 [0.47, 2.41] | 5 studies · 412 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture compared to laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Subjective cure within 18 months Laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture vs laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures | RR 1.37 [1.14, 1.64] | 1 study · 158 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Quality of life Laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture vs laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Repeat continence surgery: Laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture vs laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures | RR 0.35 [0.01, 8.37] | 1 study · 157 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse effects: perioperative complications (number of events) Laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture vs laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures | RR 0.88 [0.45, 1.7] | 1 study · 161 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse effects: bladder perforations Laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture vs laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse effects: de novo detrusor overactivity (urodynamic diagnosis) Laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture vs laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse effects: voiding dysfunction Laparoscopic colposuspension with one suture vs laparoscopic colposuspension with two sutures | RR 2.82 [0.3, 26.54] | 1 study · 158 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures compared to laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Subjective cure within 18 months Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures vs laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples | RR 1.24 [0.96, 1.59] | 2 studies · 180 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Quality of life Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures vs laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Repeat continence surgery: Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures vs laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples | RR 0.97 [0.06, 14.91] | 1 study · 69 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse effects: perioperative complications (number of events) Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures vs laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples | RR 1.94 [1.09, 3.48] | 3 studies · 260 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse effects: bladder perforations Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures vs laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse effects: de novo detrusor overactivity (urodynamic diagnosis) Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures vs laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples | RR 0.72 [0.17, 3.06] | 2 studies · 122 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse effects: voiding dysfunction Laparoscopic colposuspension with sutures vs laparoscopic colposuspension with mesh and staples | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |