ReviewCureus2024
Efficacy and Safety of Artificial Urinary Sphincters in Female Patients With Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Autologous regenerative cell therapy for female stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) significantly affects the quality of life in women, causing social, psychological, and physical distress. While artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation is a well-established treatment for male incontinence, it is less commonly used in female patients and is typically considered for cases where other treatments have failed. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of AUS implantation in treating SUI in female patients, focusing on continence rates, revision rates, explant rates, and perioperative complications. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library in September 2024. Studies published in English over the past 15 years were included if they reported outcomes such as continence, revision, explant, and complication rates in female patients who underwent AUS implantation. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4, applying a fixed-effects model where appropriate, based on heterogeneity (I
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.