ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2026
The Use of Energy-Based Devices for the Treatment of Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis of the Randomised Sham-Controlled Trials.
Review in International urogynecology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vaginal Erbium Laser for the Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Multicentre Randomised Sham-Controlled Trial.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Trial
- Fractional COInternational urogynecology journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisEnergy-based devices (EBDs), including vaginal laser and radiofrequency therapies, have been proposed as minimally invasive treatments for stress urinary incontinence (SUI), but evidence remains limited and inconsistent. We hypothesised that EBDs would provide greater symptom improvement than sham, particularly in women with mild to moderate SUI.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and One Search for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EBDs with sham in women with SUI, with at least 1 month of follow-up. The primary outcome was change in International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF) scores. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and RoB-2 assessment. Random-effects meta-analyses using restricted maximum likelihood estimation were conducted.
resultsTen RCTs (11 datasets; ~ 850 women) were included. Using a random-effects model with Knapp-Hartung adjustment, the pooled EBD analysis showed a mean difference of -1.08 points (95% CI -2.08 to -0.08), indicating a statistically significant improvement with EBD. The prediction interval (-3.63 to 1.48) suggests a wide range of possible effects, including no benefit. Heterogeneity was moderate (I
conclusionsEBDs may improve SUI symptoms compared with sham, with the most consistent benefit observed for non-ablative Er:YAG laser. However, effects are modest and short-term. High-quality RCTs with standardised protocols and long-term follow-up are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41854867What 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.