Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Urology. 2011 Oct 11;78(6):1257–1262. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.07.1413

Table 2.

Change in UDS values from baseline to 24 months are presented by failure status and surgical arm.

Success Failure
Burch Sling Burch Sling P-values
n Mean
(sd)
n Mean
(sd)
N Mean
(sd)
n Mean
(sd)
Interaction* Success vs. failure Burch vs. sling
NIF Qmax 66 -3.7
(10.4)
84 -5.0
(12.5)
123 -3.0
(13.9)
93 -3.8
(13.8)
0.85 0.52 0.43
NIF Volume 66 -6.0
(193.48)
84 13.0
(192.4)
123 20.5
(147.1)
93 -33.5
(157.8)
0.046 0.58 0.34
NIF PVR 66 -6.8
(41.3)
84 11.1
(61.65)
123 8.4
(39.9)
93 8.0
(56.3)
0.09 0.26 0.10
MCC 69 -4.0
(118.6)
96 4.5
(130.14)
119 13.0
(125.7)
103 -42.1
(152.4)
0.022 0.29 0.09
Compliance 54 32.7
(298.1)
71 5.8
(241.4)
89 -22.8
(222.8)
79 -37.52
(230.5)
0.83 0.09 0.47
PFS Qmax 36 -3.0
(6.4)
36 -3.0
(9.2)
48 -2.2
(9.4)
48 -4.6
(8.8)
0.38 0.79 0.37
Pdet@Qmax 35 3.8
(23.3)
36 18.1
(20.9)
48 0.4
(16.8)
47 6.0
(13.5)
0.13 0.008 <0.001
BOOI 35 9.9
(31.5)
36 24.2
(29.5)
48 4.7
(25.6)
47 14.8
(24.0)
0.63 0.09 0.005
*

between success vs. failure and Burch vs. sling