↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Anterior vaginal repair for urinary incontinence in women

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
5 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
152 Mendeley
Title
Anterior vaginal repair for urinary incontinence in women
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001755.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cathryn MA Glazener, Kevin Cooper, Atefeh Mashayekhi

Abstract

Anterior vaginal repair (anterior colporrhaphy) is an operation traditionally used for moderate or severe stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women. About a third of adult women experience urinary incontinence. SUI imposes significant health and economic burden to the society and the women affected. To determine the effects of anterior vaginal repair (anterior colporrhaphy) on urinary incontinence in comparison with other management options. We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 1 September 2009) and the reference lists of relevant articles. Randomised or quasi-randomised trials that included anterior vaginal repair for the treatment of urinary incontinence. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Three trial investigators were contacted for additional information. Ten trials were identified which included 385 women having an anterior vaginal repair and 627 who received comparison interventions.A single small trial provided insufficient evidence to assess anterior vaginal repair in comparison with physical therapy. The performance of anterior repair in comparison with bladder neck needle suspension appeared similar (risk ratio (RR) for failure after one year 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.56), but clinically important differences could not be confidently ruled out. No trials compared anterior repair with suburethral sling operations or laparoscopic colposuspensions, or compared alternative vaginal operations.Anterior vaginal repair was less effective than open abdominal retropubic suspension based on patient-reported cure rates in eight trials both in the medium term (failure rate within one to five years after anterior repair 97/259 (38%) versus 57/327 (17%); RR 2.29, 95% confidence Interval (CI) 1.70 to 3.08) and in the long term (after five years, (49/128 (38%) versus 31/145 (21%); RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.36 to 3.01). There was evidence from three of these trials that this was reflected in a need for more repeat operations for incontinence (25/107 (23%) versus 4/164 (2%); RR 8.87, 95% CI 3.28 to 23.94). These findings held, irrespective of the co-existence of prolapse (pelvic relaxation). Although fewer women had a prolapse after anterior repair (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.47), later prolapse operation appeared to be equally common after vaginal (3%) or abdominal (4%) operation.In respect of the type of open abdominal retropubic suspension, most data related to comparisons of anterior vaginal repair with Burch colposuspension. The few data describing comparison of anterior repair with the Marshall-Marchetti-Krantz procedure were consistent with those for Burch colposuspension. There were not enough data to allow comparison of anterior vaginal repair with physical therapy or needle suspension for primary urinary stress incontinence in women. Open abdominal retropubic suspension appeared to be better than anterior vaginal repair judged on subjective cure rates in eight trials, even in women who had prolapse in addition to stress incontinence (six trials). The need for repeat incontinence surgery was also less after the abdominal operation. However, there was not enough information about postoperative complications and morbidity.A Brief Economic Commentary (BEC) identified one study suggesting that vaginoplasty may be more cost-effective compared with tension-free vaginal tape (TVT-O).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 151 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 20%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Other 9 6%
Other 29 19%
Unknown 36 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 13%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Psychology 7 5%
Sports and Recreations 5 3%
Other 18 12%
Unknown 47 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 August 2018.
All research outputs
#1,026,851
of 16,536,729 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,787
of 11,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,665
of 274,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#99
of 257 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,536,729 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 257 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.