This is the old version of SRDR. The next, SRDRplus is available! Registration of your SRDRPlus account is free and approval is automatic. Click Here to register an SRDRPlus account.

Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

The clinical effectiveness of retropubic (IVS-02) and transobturator (IVS-04) midurethral slings: randomized trial.



Key Questions Addressed
1 Sling vs Comparator RCT outcomes (excluding AEs)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
2 Sling Adverse Events
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title The clinical effectiveness of retropubic (IVS-02) and transobturator (IVS-04) midurethral slings: randomized trial.
Author Rechberger T., Futyma K., Jankiewicz K., Adamiak A., Skorupski P.
Country Department of Gynecology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.
Year 2009
Numbers Pubmed ID: 19285788
414 (internal)

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


Extraction Form: Sling vs Comparator RCT outcomes (excluding AEs)
Arms
No arms have been defined in this extraction form.

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Country ... Other ... Poland
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome Categories Reported Objective SUI
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Subjective SUI
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
OR outcomes/complications (not "AEs")
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Population (reason for surgery etc.) Symptomatic SUI
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Urodynamic SUI
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Intrinsic sphincter deficiency
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
RCT Comparison Category Retropubic vs. Obturator
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Multicenter No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Institution Type Academic hospital
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Number of surgeons performing procedures Not reported
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Surgeons' Training Urogynecology
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Residents or fellows performing surgery? Unclear/Not reported
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study Quality (overall) B (fair)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Overall Study Notes Compares retropubic and transobturator IVS (ie multifilamentous) slings
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study Sponsor/Funding Industry
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |


Baseline Characteristics
Question Total Comments
AnswerFollow-up
No. Randomized No data entered.
Mean Age No data entered.
Post-Op Follow-Up Interval (Maximum) No data entered.



Results & Comparisons

No Results found.

Extraction Form: Sling Adverse Events
Arms
No arms have been defined in this extraction form.

Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer




Results & Comparisons

No Results found.
Adverse Events
Arm or Total Title Description Follow-up time In-hospital or After discharge Is event serious? Reported definition of serious event Number affected Number at risk (analyzed) Difference between 2 slings (eg, OR/RR or %, with 95% CI) Reported P value between slings Comments