Cochrane · systematic review · CD008709
Single‐incision sling operations for urinary incontinence in women
Carter, E, Johnson, EE, Still, M, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2023 · 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
21
current version
GRADE rated
13
No studies
8
Included studies
NR
No studies 8 · 38.1%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 4.8%Low 7 · 33.3%Moderate 3 · 14.3%High 2 · 9.5%
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
Single‐incision slings compared to autologous fascial slings for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Subjective cure or improvement of urinary incontinence: at 12 months Single‐incision slings vs autologous fascial slings | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Patient‐reported pain: at more than 24 months Single‐incision slings vs autologous fascial slings | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women with dyspareunia Single‐incision slings vs autologous fascial slings | RR 1.33 [0.32, 5.53] | 1 study · 70 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Number of women with mesh exposure, extrusion or erosion in any area Single‐incision slings vs autologous fascial slings | RR 2 [0.19, 21.06] | 1 study · 70 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Number of women with urinary retention Single‐incision slings vs autologous fascial slings | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of life: at 12 months Single‐incision slings vs autologous fascial slings | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring repeat continence surgery Single‐incision slings vs autologous fascial slings | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Single‐incision slings compared to retropubic minimally‐invasive slings for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Subjective cure or improvement of urinary incontinence: at 12 months Single‐incision slings vs retropubic minimally‐invasive slings | RR 0.99 [0.91, 1.07] | 2 studies · 297 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Patient‐reported pain: at more than 24 months Single‐incision slings vs retropubic minimally‐invasive slings | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women with dyspareunia Single‐incision slings vs retropubic minimally‐invasive slings | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women with mesh exposure, extrusion or erosion in any area Single‐incision slings vs retropubic minimally‐invasive slings | RR 1.55 [0.24, 9.82] | 3 studies · 267 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Number of women with urinary retention Single‐incision slings vs retropubic minimally‐invasive slings | RR 0.47 [0.12, 1.84] | 2 studies · 209 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Quality of life: at 12 months Single‐incision slings vs retropubic minimally‐invasive slings | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Number of women requiring repeat continence surgery or mesh revision Single‐incision slings vs retropubic minimally‐invasive slings | RR 4.19 [0.31, 57.28] | 2 studies · 182 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Single‐incision slings compared to transobturator minimally‐invasive slings for urinary incontinence in women
Population: women with urinary incontinence
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Subjective cure or improvement of urinary incontinence: 12 months Single‐incision slings vs transobturator minimally‐invasive slings | RR 1 [0.97, 1.03] | 17 studies · 2359 participants | High |
Patient‐reported pain: at more than 24 months Single‐incision slings vs transobturator minimally‐invasive slings | RR 0.12 [0.02, 0.68] | 2 studies · 250 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Number of women with dyspareunia Single‐incision slings vs transobturator minimally‐invasive slings | RR 0.78 [0.41, 1.48] | 8 studies · 810 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Number of women with mesh exposure, extrusion or erosion in any area Single‐incision slings vs transobturator minimally‐invasive slings | RR 0.61 [0.39, 0.96] | 16 studies · 2378 participants | High |
Number of women with urinary retention Single‐incision slings vs transobturator minimally‐invasive slings | RR 0.68 [0.47, 0.97] | 23 studies · 2891 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Quality of life: at 12 months Single‐incision slings vs transobturator minimally‐invasive slings | SMD 0.24 [0.09, 0.39] | 8 studies · 689 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of women requiring repeat continence surgery or mesh revision Single‐incision slings vs transobturator minimally‐invasive slings | RR 1.42 [0.94, 2.16] | 13 studies · 1460 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |