Evidence Hub

A Randomized Comparison of Concomitant Incontinence Procedures Performed With Abdominal Sacral Colpopexy: the Burch Versus Mid-urethral Sling Trial

ClinicalTrials.gov · COMPLETED, 2015

113 participants

Abstract

I. Specific Aims

Pelvic organ prolapse is a common and distressing condition that is frequently associated with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and often requires surgical repair. Abdominal sacral colpopexy is the preferred operation for repairing pelvic prolapse. As many as 91% of women with pelvic organ prolapse undergoing sacral colpopexy also experience SUI. In addition, up to 44% of previously continent women develop SUI incontinence after sacral colpopexy: perhaps because a sacral colpopexy may predispose to opening of the bladder neck if secured too tightly. The selection of a surgical procedure to prevent and manage SUI in women undergoing sacral colpopexy is empiric rather than evidence-based. Conceptually, a mid-urethral sling may be more effective than a Burch procedure for preventing urinary leakage because a sling provides outlet resistance beyond the bladder neck and therefore it may compensate for a downward tension on the bladder neck resulting from the sacral colpopexy. Indeed, clinical observations suggest that a mid-urethral sling is effective among women who have persistent urinary incontinence after sacral colpopexy with a Burch procedure. Therefore, the investigators' global hypothesis is that a mid-urethral sling is preferable to a Burch procedure for preventing and improving stress urinary incontinence in women undergoing sacral colpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. The investigators' SPECIFIC AIMS are to evaluate objective and subjective outcomes at…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 113 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free