Skip to main content
. 2017 Jul 25;2017(7):CD002912. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002912.pub7

Quadri 1985.

Methods RCT, method unspecified
Participants 103 women with mixed incontinence (urethral sphincter incompetence in all, detrusor instability in I,12/55 ; II,7/48), moderate (I,25; II, 34) to severe (I, 30; II, 14) prolapse.
 Age: I, 58 yr (range 38‐76); II, 54 (36‐75)
 Previous incontinence surgery (anterior vaginal repair): I, 7/55; II, 2/48
 Additional operations during trial: I, 55 had vaginal hysterectomy, 52 had posterior repair; II, 43 had abdominal hysterectomy, 2 had vaginal hysterectomy, 10 had Douglas obliteration, 15 had posterior repair
Interventions I: Retropubic colposuspension (48)
 II: Anterior colporrhaphy (55)
Techniques not described
Surgeon not mentioned
Other co‐interventions allowed
Outcomes Number cured
 Number with prolapse
Cure not defined
Incontinence at 3 m: I, 17/55; II, 16/48
 Incontinence persisted at 12 m (failed): I, 11/55; II, 8/48.
 Further 5/55 and 4/48 later 'cured' using drugs
 Incontinence at 5 years (subjective): I: 8/50, II: 4/49
 Incontinence at 5 years (objective): I: 6/50, II: 4/49
 Prolapse recurred: I, 3/55; II, 13/48
 [Type of prolapse:
 I, moderate cystocele 2, vaginal cuff 1;
 II, moderate to severe urethrocystocele 7, vaginal cuff 6]
 Later prolapse recurrence: I: 1/50, II: 16/49
 Dyspareunia amongst sexually active: I: 30%, II: 13% P < 0.05 (number not given)
 Vaginal length: I: 4.9 cm (SD 1.7), II: 7.3 (1)
Notes Reported in 3 conference abstracts only, further data not available. Recruitment period, data and numbers slightly different in each abstract
 Follow up 3 months, 3 years and 5 years.
 For recurrent prolapse, data from 1993 abstract used (at 5 year follow up)
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk "randomly selected to a surgical schedule"
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk not mentioned
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk not mentioned
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk not mentioned
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk not mentioned
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk no withdrawals described
Other bias Unclear risk information available in abstract only; no full text publication available