Recommendations of the SUFU/AUGS/ICS Female Stress Urinary Incontinence Surgical Publication Working Group: A common standard minimum data set for the literature.

data set stress urinary incontinence surgery

Journal

Neurourology and urodynamics
ISSN: 1520-6777
Titre abrégé: Neurourol Urodyn
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8303326

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
05 Jun 2024
Historique:
received: 19 02 2024
accepted: 28 02 2024
medline: 5 6 2024
pubmed: 5 6 2024
entrez: 5 6 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Relevant, meaningful, and achievable data points are critical in objectively assessing quality, utility, and outcomes in female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery. A minimum data set female SUI surgery studies was proposed by the first American Urological Association guidelines on the surgical management of female SUI in 1997, but recommendation adherence has been suboptimal. The Female Stress Urinary Incontinence Surgical Publication Working Group (WG) was created from members of several prominent organizations to formulate a recommended standard of study structure, description, and minimum outcome data set to be utilized in designing and publishing future SUI studies. The goal of this WG was to create a body of evidence better able to assess the outcomes of female SUI surgery. The WG reviewed the minimum data set proposed in the 1997 AUA SUI Guideline document, and other relevant literature. The body of literature was examined in the context of the profound changes in the field over the past 25 years. Through a DELPHI process, a standard study structure and minimum data set were generated. Care was taken to balance the value of several meaningful and relevant data points against the burden of creating an excessively difficult or restrictive standard that would disincentivize widespread adoption and negatively impact manuscript production and acceptance. The WG outlined standardization in four major areas: (1) study design, (2) pretreatment demographics and characterization of the study population, (3) intraoperative events, and (4) posttreatment evaluation, and complications. Forty-two items were evaluated and graded as: STANDARD-must be included; ADDITIONAL-may be included for a specific study and is inclusive of the Standard items; OPTIMAL-may be included for a comprehensive study and is inclusive of the Standard and Additional items; UNNECESSARY/LEGACY-not relevant. A reasonable, achievable, and clinically meaningful minimum data set has been constructed. A structured framework will allow future surgical interventions for female SUI to be objectively scrutinized and compared in a clinically significant manner. Ultimately, such a data set, if adopted by the academic community, will enhance the quality of the scientific literature, and ultimately improve short and long-term outcomes for female patients undergoing surgery to correct SUI.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38837735
doi: 10.1002/nau.25445
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024 The Authors. Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC, by Elsevier B.V on behalf of International Continence Society, and by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of American Urogynecologic Society.

Références

Leach GE, Dmochowski RR, Appell RA, et al. Female stress urinary incontinence clinical guidelines panel summary report on surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence. The American Urological Association. J Urol. 1997;158(3 Pt 1):875‐880.
Rovner ES, Wright CJ, Messer H. Adherence to the 1997 American Urological Association guidelines for the surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Urology. 2008;71(2):239‐242.
Bauer A, Zheng Y, Furlong D, Rovner E. Adherence to the minimum data set suggested by American Urological Association guidelines for the surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Urology. 2023;175:62‐66.
Tuong MNE, Patel NA, Zillioux JM, Rapp DE. Urinary incontinence research: compliance with research standards for clinical studies. Urology. 2020;137:55‐59.
Lee RS, DeAntoni E, Daneshgari F. Compliance with recommendations of the urodynamic society for standards of efficacy for evaluation of treatment outcomes in urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(5):482‐485.
Percie du Sert N, Hurst V, Ahluwalia A, et al. The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: updated guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol 2020. 2020;18(7):e3000410.
Cuschieri S. The CONSORT statement. Saudi J Anaesth. 2019;13(suppl 1):27.
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int Surg J. 2014;12(12):1495‐1499.
Diokno AC, Brock BM, Brown MB, Herzog AR. Prevalence of urinary incontinence and other urological symptoms in the noninstitutionalized elderly. J Urol. 1986;136:1021‐1025.
Reddy M, Kusin S, Christie A, Zimmern P. A deception study to avoid recall bias confirms similar scores for 3 validated questionnaires in the office or over the phone in women with or without urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2022;208:1288‐1294.
Malik RD, Hess DS, Christie A, Carmel ME, Zimmern PE. Domain comparison between 6 validated questionnaires administered to women with urinary incontinence. Urology. 2019;132:75‐80.
Ford AA, Rogerson L, Cody JD, Aluko P, Ogah JA. Midurethral sling operations for stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7(7):CD006375.
Zyczynski HM, Sirls LT, Greer WJ, et al. Urinary incontinence treatment network. Findings of universal cystoscopy at incontinence surgery and their sequelae. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(5):480.
Kobashi KC, Albo ME, Dmochowski RR, et al. Surgical treatment of female stress urinary incontinence: AUA/SUFU guideline. J Urol. 2017;198:875‐883.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205‐213.
Haylen BT, Freeman RM, Swift SE, et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint terminology and classification of the complications related directly to the insertion of prostheses (meshes, implants, tapes) and grafts in female pelvic floor surgery. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(1):2‐12.
Zimmern PE, Gormley EA, Stoddard AM, et al. Management of recurrent stress urinary incontinence after Burch and sling procedures. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(3):344‐348.
Nager CW, Brubaker L, Litman HJ, et al. A randomized trial of urodynamic testing before stress‐incontinence surgery. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1987‐1997.

Auteurs

Eric Rovner (E)

Department of Urology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Christopher Chermansky (C)

Department of Urology, UPMC Magee Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.

Elisabetta Costantini (E)

Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.

Roger Dmochowski (R)

Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.

Ekene Enemchukwu (E)

Department of Urology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.

David A Ginsberg (DA)

Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, California, USA.

John Heesakkers (J)

Department of Urology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Shawn Menefee (S)

Division of Urogynecology & Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Kaiser Permanente San Diego, University of California, San Diego, California, USA.

Geneviève Nadeau (G)

Department of Urology, CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.

Charles Rardin (C)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Alpert School of Medicine, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.

Philippe Zimmern (P)

Department of Urology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.

Classifications MeSH