Explore › Intervention › Retropubic midurethral sling
Intervention

Retropubic midurethral sling

Also known as: Retropubic midurethral sling (Align urethral support system) performed concurrently with abdominal sacrocolpopexy
15 findings 1 paper 10 related entities View in graph →

Related entities

conditions
Pelvic organ prolapse/stress urinary incontinence surgical mesh4 Urinary Incontinence1
outcomes
Overall continence1 Stress-specific continence1 Patient Satisfaction1 Resolution of myocardial ischemia1 Serious adverse events and surgical complications1
populations
Postmenopausal Women4 Women1
studys
PMC50352095

Findings (50)

None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No statistically significant difference was found in stress-specific continence rates between the midurethral sling and Burch groups at 6 months (74% sling vs 57% Burch, p=0.06), though the direction

Effect: null; OR 2.10; CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64

Size: OR 2.10 CI: 95% CI 0.95-4.64
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
null

No difference was found in overall continence between the midurethral sling and Burch urethropexy groups at 6-month follow-up when performed concurrently with sacrocolpopexy (51% sling vs 41% Burch, p

Effect: null; OR 1.49; CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13

Size: OR 1.49 CI: 95% CI 0.71-3.13
PMC5035209
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →

Papers (1)