Talk:Stress incontinence

note

Neither of the two drugs that are listed as alpha adrenergic blocker drugs are correct.

suburethral sling

Should use the term "suburethral sling" in the sling section and maybe make a redirect for searching for "suburethral sling" to the sling section on this page?CrocodilesAreForWimps (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:02, 4 November 2011 (UTC).

Open retropubic colposuspension surgery

I plan to incorporate a recent cochrane review on this type of surgery into this wiki page. I will have to re-do the formatting of the paragraph on the "Marshall-Marchetti-Krantz" procedure to include other open retropubic suspension surgeries. Is it alright to use peer reviewed primary sources to describe the surgeries? At the moment, there are no references at all in this paragraph. I know wikipedia prefers systematic reviews. I plan to use the systematic review to describe how effective and safe these procedures are. Thanks. JenOttawa (talk) 16:50, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I should add, the 2016 Cochrane review uses the original primary sources (published in 1961-1988) to describe the surgeries in their introduction. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26878400 Thanks again!JenOttawa (talk) 17:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Cochrane reviews are always great... per MEDRSWikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine) one can also use [1] books, and [2] (WHO,NIH, NHS)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:43, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks User:Ozzie10aaaa I will give the edit a try. In order to use the cochrane reference in the wiki article, the whole section on these types of surgeries has to be re-written. Because it will be a larger change and will involved modifying and removing some existing content, I will post it on the talk page first to get feedback before editing the actual article. JenOttawa (talk) 14:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Mesh implant complications lead to court case

Mesh implants and their side-effects apparently have lead to a court case in Oz. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jul/04/vaginal-mesh-risks-downplayed-by-johnson-johnson-court-told Implement?! --Satu Katja (talk) 19:45, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

It is important to separate vaginal meshes used for prolapse and suburethral tapes used for incontinence. They have completely different side-effect profiles and complications. Vaginal mesh has been implicated in problems with erosion that often make them sub-optimal choices, but suburethral tapes have not had this problem. The rates of erosion or other major complication of a suburethral tape is very low and they are considered to be the gold standard for treatment of stress urinary incontinence. This article doesn't seem to understand the difference between the two, so I don't think it should be applied to this page. In fact, I am surprised that a publication as highly regarded as The Guardian, didn't do better research into their topic. D.c.camero (talk) 23:05, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Letter to the editior

User:Quisqualis, PMID 19458377 which restored here, is a letter to the editor. It is not a MEDRS source. Please do not restore it again. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:46, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Recent work on this article

Hi @Jytdog:, I did not notice that you were also working on this article today. Great work cleaning it up! If you have any feedback on my contribution from a few hours ago, please let me know or adjust accordingly. JenOttawa (talk) 21:14, 28 June 2018 (UTC)