MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945754857 · doi:10.1111/aogs.13661

Urinary tract infection prevention after midurethral slings in pelvic floor reconstructive surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2019· review· en· W2945754857 on OpenAlexaff
May Sanaee, Jennifer A. Hutcheon, Maryse Larouche, Helen Brown, Terry Lee, Roxana Geoffrion

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversity of AlbertaMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSling (weapon)BacteriuriaUrinary incontinenceSurgeryMeta-analysisAntibiotic prophylaxisNitrofurantoinUrinary systemInternal medicineAntibioticsAntibiotic resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Synthetic midurethral slings are the most common procedures currently performed for stress urinary incontinence in women. Infection is a frequent complication of urogynecologic surgery. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify interventions that successfully prevent infections, including urinary tract infection (UTI) and/or bacteriuria, compared with no intervention, in women undergoing midurethral sling surgery with or without concomitant pelvic reconstructive procedures for prolapse. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The primary outcome was the development of any infection post-midurethral sling placement in women. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched for comparative studies from inception to July 2017, with no language restrictions. We used search terms related to midurethral sling, infections and infection-reduction interventions. Two independent reviewers abstracted data and assessed study quality. Pooled effect size estimates were calculated. We conducted meta-analysis of eligible studies. A protocol for this review has been registered and can be accessed online (http://hdl.handle.net/2429/64731). RESULTS: We identified seven eligible studies of infection risk-reducing interventions; all focused on UTIs. Only one study assessed preoperative antibiotics with midurethral sling alone and was halted early because of low UTI rates. All other studies (three randomized control trials and three observational studies) examined whether postoperative antibiotics decrease UTI/bacteriuria rates after midurethral sling with or without reconstructive procedures for pelvic organ prolapse and using bladder catheterization postoperatively. Due to considerable clinical heterogeneity, we only combined four studies for meta-analysis. Postoperative oral prophylactic nitrofurantoin showed no significant benefit in reducing UTI/bacteriuria in women post-midurethral sling with or without concomitant reconstructive pelvic surgery and the need for bladder catheterization, when compared with the reference group (pooled relative risk 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-1.25). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the best available evidence, postoperative oral nitrofurantoin is not effective at reducing UTI/bacteriuria rates in catheterized women after midurethral sling with or without concomitant pelvic reconstructive surgery for prolapse. For midurethral sling alone, preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis may not be needed for UTI prevention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.035
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica ScandinavicaSame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207