Resolution of myocardial ischemia

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%

Women who had a midurethral sling were significantly more likely to have resolution of preexisting urgency incontinence at 6 months than women who had a Burch procedure (72% vs 41%, p=0.03).

Effect: improvement; 72% vs 41%