Intermittent self‐dilatation for urethral stricture disease in males

Matthew J Jackson; Rajan Veeratterapillay; Chris K Harding; Trevor J Dorkin

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010258.pub2

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Contenido relacionado

Ir a:

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados
Guías
Temas

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados

Topics

Temas

Figure 1

PRISMA study flow diagram

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 ISD versus no treatment, Outcome 1 Recurrent urethral stricture.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 ISD versus no treatment, Outcome 2 Adverse events.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 One programme of ISD versus another, Outcome 1 Recurrent urethral stricture.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 One device for ISD versus another, Outcome 1 Recurrent urethral stricture (type of catheter).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 One device for ISD versus another, Outcome 2 Recurrent urethral stricture (catheter lubrication).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 One device for ISD versus another, Outcome 3 Adverse events.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Intermittent self‐dilatation compared to no treatment for males after urethral stricture surgery

Intermittent self‐dilatation compared to no treatment for males after urethral stricture surgery
Population: males after urethral stricture surgery Intervention: intermittent self‐dilatation Comparison: no treatment
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	No of Participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	No treatment	Intermittent self‐dilatation
Recurrent urethral stricture Follow‐up: 8‐24 months	618 per 1000	433 per 1000 (297 to 618)	RR 0.7 (0.48 to 1)	404 (6 studies)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low^1,2,3
The basis for the assumed risk* (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
¹ Downgraded by two for risk of bias: all six trials comprising the quantitative synthesis were judged high risk of bias in two or more domains. ² Downgraded by two for inconsistency: the point estimates of the effect size vary widely; the statistical test for heterogeneity is highly significant (P = 0.003), and the I² is large (72%). ³ Downgraded by two for imprecision: the total number of events was less than 300 and the 95% confidence interval of the effect size is 0.48 to 1.00 (> 50% and includes the line of no effect).

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Intermittent self‐dilatation compared to no treatment for males after urethral stricture surgery

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 1. ISD versus no treatment

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Recurrent urethral stricture Show forest plot	6	404	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.70 [0.48, 1.00]

2 Adverse events Show forest plot	2	91	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.60 [0.11, 3.26]

2.1 Urinary tract infection/bacteriuria	2	91	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.60 [0.11, 3.26]

Comparison 1. ISD versus no treatment

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 2. One programme of ISD versus another

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Recurrent urethral stricture Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

1.1 Short duration versus long duration of treatment	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Comparison 2. One programme of ISD versus another

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 3. One device for ISD versus another

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Recurrent urethral stricture (type of catheter) Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

1.1 LoFric vs PVC	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
2 Recurrent urethral stricture (catheter lubrication) Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

2.1 Triamcinolone gel versus water‐based lubricant	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
3 Adverse events Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

Comparison 3. One device for ISD versus another

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

The Cochrane Library

Scolaris Language Selector Scolaris Language Selector

Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane

Idioma de la web

Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet