FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4292056566> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4292056566 endingPage "152" @default.
• W4292056566 startingPage "1" @default.
• W4292056566 abstract "Background Stress urinary incontinence is common in men after prostate surgery and can be difficult to improve. Implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter is the most common surgical procedure for persistent stress urinary incontinence, but it requires specialist surgical skills, and revisions may be necessary. In addition, the sphincter is relatively expensive and its operation requires adequate patient dexterity. New surgical approaches include the male synthetic sling, which is emerging as a possible alternative. However, robust comparable data, derived from randomised controlled trials, on the relative safety and efficacy of the male synthetic sling and the artificial urinary sphincter are lacking. Objective We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the male synthetic sling with those of the artificial urinary sphincter surgery in men with persistent stress urinary incontinence after prostate surgery. Design This was a multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial, with a parallel non-randomised cohort and embedded qualitative component. Randomised controlled trial allocation was carried out by remote web-based randomisation (1 : 1), minimised on previous prostate surgery (radical prostatectomy or transurethral resection of the prostate), radiotherapy (or not, in relation to prostate surgery) and centre. Surgeons and participants were not blind to the treatment received. Non-randomised cohort allocation was participant and/or surgeon preference. Setting The trial was set in 28 UK urological centres in the NHS. Participants Participants were men with urodynamic stress incontinence after prostate surgery for whom surgery was deemed appropriate. Exclusion criteria included previous sling or artificial urinary sphincter surgery, unresolved bladder neck contracture or urethral stricture after prostate surgery, and an inability to give informed consent or complete trial documentation. Interventions We compared male synthetic sling with artificial urinary sphincter. Main outcome measures The clinical primary outcome measure was men’s reports of continence (assessed from questions 3 and 4 of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form) at 12 months post randomisation (with a non-inferiority margin of 15%). The primary economic outcome was cost-effectiveness (assessed as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year at 24 months post randomisation). Results In total, 380 men were included in the randomised controlled trial ( n = 190 in each group), and 99 out of 100 men were included in the non-randomised cohort. In terms of continence, the male sling was non-inferior to the artificial urinary sphincter (intention-to-treat estimated absolute risk difference –0.034, 95% confidence interval –0.117 to 0.048; non-inferiority p = 0.003), indicating a lower success rate in those randomised to receive a sling, but with a confidence interval excluding the non-inferiority margin of –15%. In both groups, treatment resulted in a reduction in incontinence symptoms (as measured by the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form). Between baseline and 12 months’ follow-up, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form score fell from 16.1 to 8.7 in the male sling group and from 16.4 to 7.5 in the artificial urinary sphincter group (mean difference for the time point at 12 months 1.30, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 2.49; p = 0.032). The number of serious adverse events was small (male sling group, n = 8; artificial urinary sphincter group, n = 15; one man in the artificial urinary sphincter group experienced three serious adverse events). Quality-of-life scores improved and satisfaction was high in both groups. Secondary outcomes that showed statistically significant differences favoured the artificial urinary sphincter over the male sling. Outcomes of the non-randomised cohort were similar. The male sling cost less than the artificial sphincter but was associated with a smaller quality-adjusted life-year gain. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for male slings compared with an artificial urinary sphincter suggests that there is a cost saving of £425,870 for each quality-adjusted life-year lost. The probability that slings would be cost-effective at a £30,000 willingness-to-pay threshold for a quality-adjusted life-year was 99%. Limitations Follow-up beyond 24 months is not available. More specific surgical/device-related pain outcomes were not included. Conclusions Continence rates improved from baseline, with the male sling non-inferior to the artificial urinary sphincter. Symptoms and quality of life significantly improved in both groups. Men were generally satisfied with both procedures. Overall, secondary and post hoc analyses favoured the artificial urinary sphincter over the male sling. Future work Participant reports of any further surgery, satisfaction and quality of life at 5-year follow-up will inform longer-term outcomes. Administration of an additional pain questionnaire would provide further information on pain levels after both surgeries. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN49212975. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 26, No. 36. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information." @default.
• W4292056566 created "2022-08-17" @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5000562097 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5002568917 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5004165162 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5018700194 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5025714543 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5027594088 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5031269561 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5031882395 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5048829148 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5061293925 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5061749118 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5062289033 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5068295947 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5070293381 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5072600519 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5081177970 @default.
• W4292056566 creator A5084883597 @default.
• W4292056566 date "2022-08-01" @default.
• W4292056566 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
• W4292056566 title "Synthetic sling or artificial urinary sphincter for men with urodynamic stress incontinence after prostate surgery: the MASTER non-inferiority RCT" @default.
• W4292056566 cites W118534314 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W1780778418 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W1896494111 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W1965247385 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W1965742808 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W1973902892 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W1979290264 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W1990973473 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W1994222210 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2002534898 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2009244027 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2010411971 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2021720741 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2023110392 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2030995179 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2036259241 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2067293681 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2076133875 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2077197287 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2087810839 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2088191311 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2090456444 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2115372612 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2118249259 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2131291960 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2137613048 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2142704172 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2165895679 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2172151487 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2583318476 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2792686108 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W2905880580 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W3047037894 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W4236434522 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W4247964941 @default.
• W4292056566 cites W4300543864 @default.
• W4292056566 doi "https://doi.org/10.3310/tbfz0277" @default.
• W4292056566 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35972773" @default.
• W4292056566 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4292056566 type Work @default.
• W4292056566 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W4292056566 countsByYear W42920565662023 @default.
• W4292056566 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5000562097 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5002568917 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5004165162 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5018700194 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5025714543 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5027594088 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5031269561 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5031882395 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5048829148 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5061293925 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5061749118 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5062289033 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5068295947 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5070293381 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5072600519 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5081177970 @default.
• W4292056566 hasAuthorship W4292056566A5084883597 @default.
• W4292056566 hasBestOaLocation W42920565661 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C122732770 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C178103971 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C2776235491 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C2778531004 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C2779466945 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C2779523193 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C2779656439 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C2779762690 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4292056566 hasConceptScore W4292056566C121608353 @default.

• next