Do severe obese patients with stress urinary incontinence benefit from transobturator tape procedure? 3-year surgical outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We evaluate the impact of severe obesity on surgical outcomes of the transobturator tape (TOT) procedure in patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). METHODS: In total, 32 women with severe obesity (body mass index [BMI] >35 kg/m(2)) were included in the study. All patients were preoperatively evaluated with history, pelvic examination, ultrasonography, and cough stress test. All patients completed the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short form (ICIQ-SF) preoperatively and at the postoperative follow-up. Cure of incontinence was defined as being completely dry after surgery. Cure was assessed subjectively and objectively. Subjective improvement defined as an International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short form (ICIQ-SF) score ≤12 and satisfaction with surgery. Failure was defined as having no change or worsening of urinary incontinence after surgery. Postoperative patient satisfaction was assessed using a visual analog scale. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time and mean BMI were 40.9 ± 20.9 months and 38 ± 3 kg/m(2), respectively. According to preoperative ICIQ-SF questionnaire scores, 20 patients (62.5%) had severe and 12 patients (37.5 %) had very severe urinary incontinence symptoms. No patient had slight or moderate symptoms. None of the patients experienced worsening symptoms after surgery. Objective cure, subjective cure, subjective improvement and patient satisfaction rates were 81.2%, 46.8%, 37.5%, and 84.3% respectively. Our overall complication rate was 9.3%. None of the patients experienced intraoperative complications. CONCLUSION: In experienced hands, TOT is an effective and safe procedure to treat SUI, with minimal complications in severe obese women.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".