Mikos Themistoklis, Theodoulidis Iakovos, Karalis Tilemachos, Zafrakas Menelaos, Grimbizis Grigoris F
1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Papageorgiou General Hospital, Periferiaki Odos Thessalonikis, Nea Efkarpia, 56403, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Int Urogynecol J. 2024 Dec;35(12):2255-2279. doi: 10.1007/s00192-024-05934-w. Epub 2024 Oct 19.
Various instruments are used to evaluate the severity of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in clinical trials for SUI surgery. We conducted a scoping review with the primary aim of investigating the use of such instruments.
A comprehensive search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP was carried out. Inclusion criteria were studies including patients undergoing surgical intervention for SUI with assessment of SUI severity performed pre- and post-operatively. Exclusion criteria were nonprospective studies, nonrandomized studies, studies not in the English language, and the absence of reporting the methods of SUI severity evaluation in the study.
In total, 8,886 articles were identified, yielding 100 papers for data extraction. The most frequent interventions were mid-urethral slings (85 studies), Burch colposuspension (10 studies), and the use of bulking agents (3 studies). The most frequently used instruments for objective evaluation of SUI were urodynamics (90 studies), nonvalidated cough stress test (83 studies), and 1-h pad test (28 studies). The most frequently used instruments for subjective evaluation were bladder diary (37 studies), Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 (26 studies), and Urinary Distress Inventory-6 (23 studies). There were three studies reporting results according to the severity of pre- and post-operative SUI.
There is significant heterogeneity regarding the instruments used to evaluate the severity of SUI in surgical trials for female incontinence. There is a paucity of data regarding results according to the pre-operative severity of SUI. Hence, commonly agreed standardized methods for the assessment of SUI severity are needed to improve comparability between clinical trials for SUI surgery.
在压力性尿失禁(SUI)手术的临床试验中,使用了各种工具来评估SUI的严重程度。我们进行了一项范围综述,主要目的是调查此类工具的使用情况。
在PubMed/MEDLINE、Cochrane图书馆、ClinicalTrials.gov和世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台(WHO ICTRP)上进行了全面检索。纳入标准为包括接受SUI手术干预且在术前和术后进行SUI严重程度评估的患者的研究。排除标准为非前瞻性研究、非随机研究、非英文研究以及研究中未报告SUI严重程度评估方法的情况。
总共识别出8886篇文章,从中筛选出100篇进行数据提取。最常见的干预措施是中段尿道吊带术(85项研究)、Burch阴道悬吊术(10项研究)和使用填充剂(3项研究)。用于客观评估SUI最常用的工具是尿动力学检查(90项研究)、未经验证的咳嗽压力试验(83项研究)和1小时尿垫试验(28项研究)。用于主观评估最常用的工具是膀胱日记(37项研究)、尿失禁影响问卷-7(26项研究)和排尿困扰量表-6(23项研究)。有三项研究根据术前和术后SUI的严重程度报告了结果。
在女性尿失禁手术试验中,用于评估SUI严重程度的工具存在显著异质性。关于根据术前SUI严重程度得出的结果的数据很少。因此,需要普遍认可的标准化SUI严重程度评估方法,以提高SUI手术临床试验之间的可比性。