Skip to main content

Stress Urinary Incontinence (Female)

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is the involuntary leakage of urine with physical exertion, coughing, sneezing, or any activity that raises intra-abdominal pressure. In the 2017–2018 US NHANES cycle, 45.9% of adult women reported stress leakage at least once in the preceding year.[13] In the RISE FOR HEALTH cohort (3,000 US women, 2022–2023), 79% reported lower urinary tract symptoms in the preceding 7 days, and 7.1% reported treatment for them.[18]

Pathophysiology​

SUI occurs when intra-abdominal pressure transiently exceeds urethral closure pressure, allowing urine to escape.[2][3] Two primary mechanisms account for most cases:

Urethral hypermobility Loss of pelvic floor muscular support or vaginal connective tissue prevents the urethra and bladder neck from assuming a stable closed position in response to pressure increases. Weakness of support structures and collagen-dependent tissue damage are central. In a matched comparison of women with primary SUI and asymptomatic controls, urethral closure pressure distinguished the groups more strongly than measures of urethral support.[32] Levator ani avulsion is a plausible contributor to this loss of support, but a systematic review and meta-analysis of seven studies (2,388 women) found no significant association between levator avulsion and SUI (pooled OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.56–1.34, adjusted OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.40–1.30).[19]

The DeLancey hammock hypothesis: a cough compresses the urethra against a supported anterior vaginal wall when lateral attachments are intact, but leaks when the hammock is lax

DeLancey's hammock hypothesis. The urethra rests on a supportive layer (anterior vaginal wall + endopelvic fascia) anchored laterally to the arcus tendineus and levator ani. With intact support, a cough compresses the urethra against this stable backboard and the lumen closes (continent). When the lateral (paravaginal) attachments fail, the hammock sags, the urethra becomes hypermobile, and the cough no longer compresses it — stress leakage. This is why a midurethral sling restores continence: it re-creates the suburethral backboard. (Original WARWIKI schematic)

Intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD) Loss of intrinsic urethral mucosal and muscular tone results in poor urethral coaptation and can reduce resting urethral closure pressure. AUA/SUFU notes that ISD is often defined by a leak point pressure <60 cmH₂O or a maximal urethral closure pressure <20 cmH₂O.[10] EAU 2026 advises against using either pressure test to grade SUI severity .[15] ISD produces more severe leakage, often with minimal provocation, and is associated with prior urethral surgery, radiation, and neurological injury.

In practice, many patients exhibit a combination of both mechanisms. Blaivas and Olsson classified stress incontinence by the degree of vesical neck descent and the integrity of the intrinsic sphincter, and used the classification to choose the operation.[25]

Risk Factors​

Risk FactorNotes
Vaginal deliveryVaginal versus cesarean delivery was associated with long-term SUI (adjusted OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.56–2.19; 15 studies); a pooled instrumental-versus-spontaneous vaginal comparison found no significant difference (adjusted OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84–1.45; four studies).[30] Parous versus nulliparous status was also associated with SUI in a separate two-study observational subgroup.[31]
Increasing parityCumulative effect with each vaginal birth
Obesity / elevated BMIChronic elevated intra-abdominal pressure; weight loss reduces severity
Age and menopauseEstrogen deficiency reduces urethral mucosal coaptation; prevalence peaks 40–60 years
Race/ethnicityIn a U.S. multiethnic cohort of older women, SUI was less prevalent among Black than White women after adjustment; Hispanic and White rates did not differ significantly.[34]
Pelvic surgeryBenign hysterectomy was associated with SUI within 10 years in a meta-analysis (pooled effect estimate 1.31, 95% CI 1.06–1.56; 14 studies).[33]
Conditions raising IAPChronic cough, constipation, heavy lifting, high-impact exercise
SmokingChronic cough; collagen effects
Connective tissue disordersJoint hypermobility syndrome / hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome is associated with more than twice the risk of pelvic organ prolapse and high rates of stress and urgency incontinence; affected women often present younger and carry added perioperative considerations (tissue fragility, impaired wound healing)[21]

In an anonymous survey of 271 identical twin pairs (mean age 47.1 years), analyzed to account for shared genetics within pairs, vaginal delivery was associated with self-reported stress incontinence relative to cesarean delivery (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.14–4.55), as were age, parity and obesity.[26] In a case-control study of women aged 39 to 65 years without prolapse (213 with moderate or severe SUI and 213 age-matched controls with none or mild), lifetime strenuous activity was not associated with SUI (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.99–1.25), whereas greater strenuous activity during the teen years modestly increased the odds (OR 1.37 per 7 additional hours a week, 95% CI 1.09–1.71).[27]

SUI During Pregnancy​

SUI is the most common type of urinary incontinence during pregnancy. Symptoms may improve after delivery, but pregnancy-associated leakage is linked to a higher risk of postpartum incontinence. A PRISMA-guided review of prevalence and treatment studies reported a mean SUI prevalence in pregnancy of 41% (range 18.6% to 60%) that increases with gestational age.[16] The proposed mechanism is the growing uterus and fetal weight adding pressure on the pelvic floor muscles through pregnancy, combined with pregnancy-related hormonal change, reducing pelvic floor muscle strength and its supportive and sphincteric function and leading to bladder neck and urethral mobility. Higher prenatal BMI, older maternal age and multigravidity are associated with a higher risk. Among women continent at enrollment, antenatal pelvic floor muscle training probably reduced urinary incontinence in late pregnancy compared with usual care (6 trials, 624 women; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20–0.72), while evidence is insufficient to determine treatment benefit for women already incontinent during pregnancy.[16][35] Two participants in one prevention trial withdrew because of pelvic floor pain; the other trials did not report adverse effects.[35]

Diagnostic Evaluation​

History​

The Women’s Preventive Services Initiative recommends annual screening for urinary incontinence, including its impact on activities and quality of life, with further evaluation when indicated.[9]

Elements to assess:

  • Leakage pattern: Predictable with cough, sneeze, Valsalva, exercise, position change
  • Severity: Frequency (daily, weekly), volume (small drops versus soaking), pad use and type
  • Degree of bother: Drives treatment urgency and goal-setting
  • Coexisting symptoms: Urgency, urgency incontinence, incomplete emptying, prolapse symptoms, fecal incontinence, dyspareunia
  • Sexual activity: Ask directly about urine loss during sexual activity, including whether it occurs with penetration, orgasm, or both; coital incontinence is common but underreported
  • Obstetric and surgical history: Deliveries, episiotomies, prior anti-incontinence surgery
  • Medication review: Diuretics, α-blockers, anticholinergics, caffeine, alcohol

Physical Examination​

FindingSignificance
Vulvovaginal atrophyCommon in postmenopausal women; may worsen symptoms
Skin maceration / excoriationSeverity of leakage; hygiene counseling
Pelvic organ prolapseMay mask or worsen SUI; assess all three compartments. In a continent woman planning prolapse surgery, perform a prolapse-reduction stress test for occult SUI and counsel about the risks and benefits of concomitant continence surgery versus prolapse repair alone.[15]
Pelvic floor muscle strengthBaseline for PFMT; assess ability to contract voluntarily
Urethral hypermobilityThe Q-tip test has historically defined hypermobility as an excursion of 30° or more from rest to strain; NICE NG123 advises against using it to assess women with urinary incontinence.[36][14]
Urethral diverticulum / fistulaRule out anatomical causes of leakage

Urinalysis​

Obtain urinalysis to assess for infection, hematuria, glycosuria, and pyuria; investigate abnormal findings before attributing leakage solely to SUI.[2][3][10]

Voiding Diary​

A fluid intake and voiding diary kept for at least three days identifies modifiable factors (total intake, caffeine, nocturnal patterns) and quantifies leakage frequency when history is insufficient.[3][15]

Cough Stress Test​

With approximately 300 mL in the bladder, observe for urethral leakage after cough or Valsalva.[2] Leakage synchronous with the cough indicates SUI; positive predictive value 78–97%.[3][37]

Postvoid Residual​

Performed by catheterization or bladder ultrasound. Important before surgical planning to exclude incomplete emptying.

Urodynamic Testing​

Urodynamics may be omitted for an uncomplicated index patient with clearly demonstrated SUI. ValUE supports office evaluation alone in its selected population. Consider additional evaluation, including urodynamics when it can change management, for:[10][11]

  • Mixed incontinence with significant urgency component
  • Prior anti-incontinence surgery (failed or new evaluation)
  • Neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction
  • Elevated PVR or voiding dysfunction
  • Discordance between symptoms and examination findings

A secondary analysis of a 597-woman midurethral-sling trial population (valid VLPP n = 372; MUCP n = 539) found that urethral-function urodynamic measures (VLPP, MUCP) had little or no correlation with subjective or objective incontinence-severity measures, even though VLPP and MUCP correlated moderately with each other (r = 0.36, P < 0.001); patient-reported severity measures, in turn, correlated only weakly to moderately with objective measures such as pad weight and 3-day diary episode frequency (r = −0.06 to 0.45).[22]

Treatment​

Step 1 — Conservative (First-Line)​

Pelvic Floor Muscle Training (PFMT)​

The cornerstone of first-line management and the ACP-recommended initial treatment for all women with SUI.[1] PFMT involves repeated voluntary pelvic floor contractions taught and supervised by a trained physiotherapist or pelvic health specialist. NICE NG123 offers a supervised trial of at least 3 months as first-line treatment for stress or mixed incontinence, with at least 8 contractions three times daily, continued if beneficial.[14]

Evidence:

  • PFMT improves patient-reported cure or improvement and condition-specific quality of life versus control; effects depend on the population and outcome assessed.[7]
  • Adding PFMT to another active treatment is a separate comparison: the 2015 review found insufficient evidence for a general additional benefit across those combinations.[4]
  • About half of women with stress-predominant incontinence are satisfied 1 year after starting PFMT; ACOG adds that training is most effective when started under supervision and that its effect wanes over time[6]
  • More intensive programs with adherence support are more effective than unsupervised instruction[7]
  • Agree on the patient’s goals and distinguish complete dryness, meaningful symptom reduction and satisfaction; the cited study used a ≥50% episode reduction as its outcome definition.[1]

Adjunctive physical therapy modalities:

ModalityEvidence
BiofeedbackMay help teach or monitor a contraction
Vaginal conesWeighted resistance training; modest benefit
Electrical stimulationEvidence is strongest for urgency incontinence; data for SUI are limited. NICE advises against routine use with PFMT but supports considering it, with or without biofeedback, for women who cannot actively contract the pelvic floor[14]
Intravaginal pessariesIncontinence ring/dish type; improves QoL; may be combined with PFMT

Lifestyle Modifications​

ModificationRationale
Weight lossModerate weight loss improves UI in overweight and obese women (ACOG Level A; in the 6-month randomized trial ACOG cites, the intervention group lost a mean 7.8 kg, about 8% of baseline weight, and total weekly incontinence episodes fell 47% from baseline versus 28% in controls[28]); NICE advises weight loss for women with incontinence and a BMI above 30[6][7][14]
Fluid managementIndividualize intake to clinical needs and the diary; avoid both excess intake and dehydration
Caffeine reductionFor coexisting OAB, EAU 2026 advises that reducing caffeine may improve urgency and frequency, but not incontinence .[15] In a case-control study of women with urinary incontinence, intake >400 mg/day was associated with detrusor instability after adjustment for age and smoking (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.1–6.5).[20]
Reduce nocturnal fluidsFor nocturia-associated symptoms
Frequent voidingReduce bladder volume at times of activity
Constipation managementReduces chronic Valsalva and pelvic floor strain

Surgical options​

See the Female SUI treatment database for procedure selection and comparisons.

Offer surgical counselling when desired, including before conservative treatment fails; discuss conservative and operative choices, individual risks and goals.[10]

Midurethral Slings (Synthetic Mesh)​

Midurethral slings have substantial efficacy evidence, but “success” depends on its definition. In TOMUS, retropubic and transobturator slings met the prespecified equivalence criterion for objective 12-month success; subjective success did not meet equivalence. Discuss retention or voiding dysfunction, pain or neurologic symptoms, mesh complications and retreatment alongside expected benefit.[12] EAU 2026 recommends intraoperative cystoscopy during synthetic midurethral sling placement to check for bladder perforation .[15]

Note on mesh: The FDA's 2011 safety communication and 2019 stop-selling order concerned transvaginal mesh for prolapse; they did not prohibit midurethral slings for SUI, which remain FDA-cleared devices. Mesh-related concerns have increased patient hesitancy; informed discussion is needed.[8]

Types of midurethral slings:

TypeApproachNotes
Retropubic (TVT)Behind pubic boneHighest long-term data (EAU advises women that long-term outcomes are better than transobturator); bladder perforation in 15/298 (5.0%) retropubic recipients in TOMUS[12][15]
Transobturator (TOT/TVT-O)Lateral obturatorLower bladder injury risk; higher groin/thigh pain rate. NICE NG123 advises against this route unless specific circumstances make retropubic insertion unsuitable.[14]
Single-incision mini-slingAnchored midurethralLong-term data still maturing. EAU notes non-inferior patient-reported success for Ajust and Altis at 36 months but more mesh exposure, repeat SUI surgery and dyspareunia than conventional MUS.[15] NICE NG123 limits single-incision short mesh sling insertion to clinical trials.[14]

Autologous Fascial Sling​

Pubovaginal sling using rectus fascia or fascia lata. Established evidence; a non-mesh surgical option when synthetic material is declined or unsuitable. AUA/SUFU 2023 advises against synthetic midurethral sling placement during concomitant urethral diverticulectomy, urethrovaginal fistula repair, or urethral mesh excision , and advises strong consideration of mesh avoidance after radiation or with significant scarring or poor tissue quality .[10] Higher voiding dysfunction rate than midurethral slings; durable long-term results.[8][10]

Burch Colposuspension​

Open or laparoscopic retropubic colposuspension uses paravaginal sutures to Cooper's ligament. It is an established alternative to a sling. Concomitant continence surgery at abdominal sacrocolpopexy is a separate shared decision, balancing postoperative leakage against added complications.[6][10]

Urethral Bulking Agents​

Periurethral or transurethral injection of bulking material (polyacrylamide hydrogel, calcium hydroxylapatite, dextranomer/hyaluronic acid, which falls under the EAU caution on hyaluronic acid agents noted below). Office-based, minimally invasive option. Lower cure rates than slings; bulking may be useful when anesthesia poses substantial risk, after sling failure, or as a temporizing measure. AUA/SUFU lists bulking as an option for SUI with a fixed, immobile urethra , while the 2024 AUGS statement notes that ISD does not predict bulking outcomes.[8][10][29] EAU 2026 offers bulking to women who request a lower-risk procedure , counseling that efficacy is lower than other operations and repeat injections are likely; it advises against autologous fat and hyaluronic acid agents because of higher adverse-event risk and notes that the periurethral route may carry more retention than the transurethral route.[15]

See: Urethral Bulking Agents

Artificial Urinary Sphincter​

Reserved for severe, complicated SUI, particularly ISD after prior failed surgery; prior pelvic radiotherapy is associated with higher AUS failure and explantation risk.[15] High-quality data limited for this indication in women: EAU 2026 rates the evidence level 3 and lists the AUS among options for complicated SUI , warning of a high risk of complications, mechanical failure or explantation even in expert centres ; see AUS article.[15]

Pharmacotherapy​

Medical therapies for SUI are generally not recommended. Current evidence-based pharmacological treatments primarily address urgency incontinence (antimuscarinics, β3-agonists) and not SUI.[14][15]

Duloxetine (SNRI, not FDA-approved for SUI in the US) has modest evidence for symptom improvement but significant side effects limiting use; not in routine clinical practice in North America. EAU 2026 offers duloxetine, where licensed, only to selected women unresponsive to conservative care who wish to avoid surgery , with dose titration on starting and stopping , and recommends vaginal estrogen for postmenopausal women with SUI and vulvovaginal atrophy .[15] Across 17 studies (2,111 patients) examining several urinary outcomes, a 2026 meta-analysis reported lower SUI occurrence after versus before vulvovaginal estrogen treatment (pooled OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.05–0.29); 2,111 is the overall review sample, not the SUI-specific denominator.[17] NICE advises against duloxetine as first-line treatment and against routine second-line use, but allows it as second-line therapy for women who prefer medication to surgery or are unsuitable for surgery, with counseling about adverse effects.[14]

Emerging Therapies​

Vaginal laser therapy (CO₂ fractional laser, Er:YAG laser) has been investigated for SUI. A 2025 Cochrane review of nine studies (689 women) found very-low-certainty evidence: short-term continence may differ little from sham or control, and the small average patient-reported improvement did not meet its prespecified threshold for clinical importance. The review reported no major adverse events in these trials, but longer-term benefit and safety remain uncertain; laser therapy is not established routine SUI care.[5]

Outcomes​

Outcome definitions and follow-up must accompany any percentage. In TOMUS, 565 of 597 randomized women were assessed for 12-month success or counted as failures; objective success was 80.8% after retropubic and 77.7% after transobturator sling, and subjective success was 62.2% and 55.8%, respectively.[12] Objective outcomes met the trial's equivalence criterion, while subjective outcomes did not.

For counseling, separate symptom improvement, complete dryness, satisfaction, adverse effects and retreatment. The selected evidence records the principal trial comparisons; procedure pages contain the operation-specific evidence.

Sexual function and coital incontinence. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 21 studies of continence surgery (TVT, TVT-O/TOT, Burch, autologous fascial sling) without concurrent prolapse repair found a significant reduction in coital incontinence after surgery (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.07–0.17); study heterogeneity and outcome-measure variation limited certainty.[23] A combined secondary analysis of SISTEr and TOMUS included 924 women with a PISQ-12 questionnaire completed at one or more study visits (autologous fascial sling, Burch colposuspension, retropubic sling, or transobturator sling). Available scores improved clinically over 24 months across all four procedures, with no significant difference by procedure type; most improvement occurred within the first 12 months.[24] Counsel that sexual function improved on average in these trial cohorts, while individual outcomes vary; this secondary analysis detected no statistically significant difference in 24-month PISQ-12 scores among the four operations.

Clinical Approach Summary​

A practical assessment and shared-decision checklist:[10]

  1. Assess bother and QoL impact. Drives urgency and goals of treatment
  2. Quantify leakage. Frequency, volume, pad use, pad weight test if available
  3. Pelvic exam. Prolapse assessment, muscle function, urethral mobility, cough stress test
  4. Urinalysis. Rule out UTI
  5. Conservative option: Offer supervised PFMT and relevant lifestyle measures (weight loss when indicated; caffeine reduction for coexisting OAB symptoms); surgery need not await PFMT failure.[10][15]
  6. Adjuncts: Incontinence pessary if patient prefers non-surgical option or awaits PFMT response
  7. Procedure discussion when desired: Discuss sling, colposuspension, fascial sling and bulking according to goals; use additional testing according to complexity.

Referral Indications​

  • Significant pelvic organ prolapse (concurrent repair consideration)
  • Elevated PVR / voiding dysfunction
  • Failed prior anti-incontinence surgery
  • Mixed incontinence with dominant urgency component
  • Consideration of surgical management
  • Neurological comorbidity

Selected evidence​

ValUE · 2012[11]; TOMUS · 2010[12].

Female urinary incontinence — key study comparisons
Study and populationComparison and resultsUse and limitations
ValUE · 2012

Women with uncomplicated, demonstrable stress-predominant incontinence.

Randomized n=630

Source and methods: ValUE · 2012
Source
Nager CW et al. A Randomized Trial of Urodynamic Testing before Stress-Incontinence Surgery (2012). DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1113595
Design
Multicentre randomized noninferiority trial
Denominators
315 randomized per group.
Follow-up
12 months
Office evaluation plus urodynamics vs office evaluation alone

Composite success: ≥70% UDI improvement and much/very much better on PGI-I · 12 months

76.9% with urodynamics vs 77.2% with office evaluation alone.

Difference −0.3 percentage points; 95% CI −7.5 to 6.9. Prespecified noninferiority margin: 11 percentage points.

Supports omitting routine preoperative urodynamics in appropriately selected index patients.

  • Restricted to uncomplicated demonstrable SUI.
TOMUS · 2010

Women having surgery for stress urinary incontinence.

Randomized n=597

Source and methods: TOMUS · 2010
Source
Richter HE et al. Retropubic versus Transobturator Midurethral Slings for Stress Incontinence (2010). DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0912658
Design
Multicentre randomized equivalence trial
Denominators
565 (94.6%) completed the 12-month assessment.
Follow-up
12 months in this report
Retropubic vs transobturator midurethral sling

Objective success: negative stress/pad tests and no retreatment · 12 months

80.8% vs 77.7%.

Difference 3.0 percentage points; 95% CI −3.6 to 9.6; met the ±12-point equivalence margin.

Subjective success: no symptoms/diary leakage or retreatment · 12 months

62.2% vs 55.8%.

Difference 6.4 percentage points; 95% CI −1.6 to 14.3; did not meet equivalence.

Discuss endpoint definitions and route-specific complications.

  • Voiding dysfunction requiring surgery: 2.7% vs 0%; neurologic symptoms: 4.0% vs 9.4%.

See Also​

Podcasts​

Management of Female Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Organ Prolapse
BackTable Urology, Ep. 66 (2022) · Amy Park, Jose Silva
backtable.com
Midurethral Slings vs Bulkamid: What Clinicians Need to Know
BackTable Urology, Ep. 140 (2023) · Tamsin Greenwell, Suzette Sutherland
backtable.com
SUFU 22: Point-Counterpoint: MUS vs Bulking Agent in a 55-year-old woman with SUI
SUFU Podcast (2022)
podcasts.apple.com

Videos​

Treatments for Stress Urinary Incontinence in Women
Dr. Rogers, Grand Rounds in Urology
Urodynamic Interpretation of Stress Incontinence
Laborie webinar series (2016)

References​

1. Qaseem A, Dallas P, Forciea MA, et al. Nonsurgical management of urinary incontinence in women: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161(6):429–40. doi:10.7326/m13-2410. PMID 25222388

2. Wu JM. Stress incontinence in women. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(25):2428–36. doi:10.1056/nejmcp1914037. PMID 34161707

3. Lukacz ES, Santiago-Lastra Y, Albo ME, Brubaker L. Urinary incontinence in women: a review. JAMA. 2017;318(16):1592–1604. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.12137. PMID 29067433

4. Ayeleke RO, Hay-Smith EJ, Omar MI. Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(11):CD010551. PMID 26526663 doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010551.pub3

5. Ippolito GM, Crescenze IM, Sitto H, et al. Vaginal lasers for treating stress urinary incontinence in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025;7:CD013643. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD013643.pub2

6. Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology and the American Urogynecologic Society. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 155: Urinary incontinence in women. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(5):e66–e81. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001148. PMID 26488524

7. Todhunter-Brown A, Hazelton C, Campbell P, et al. Conservative interventions for treating urinary incontinence in women: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022;9:CD012337. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012337.pub2. PMID 36053030

8. Moris L, Heesakkers J, Nitti V, et al. Prevalence, diagnosis, and management of stress urinary incontinence in women: a collaborative review. Eur Urol. 2025;87(3):292–301. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2024.12.017. PMID 39848866

9. O'Reilly N, Nelson HD, Conry JM, et al. Screening for urinary incontinence in women: a recommendation from the Women's Preventive Services Initiative. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(5):320–28. doi:10.7326/m18-0595. PMID 30105360

10. American Urological Association / SUFU. Surgical Treatment of Female Stress Urinary Incontinence, amended 2023. Full guideline. Accessed September 11, 2026.

11. Nager CW, Brubaker L, Litman HJ, et al. A randomized trial of urodynamic testing before stress-incontinence surgery. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(21):1987-97. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1113595.

12. Richter HE, Albo ME, Zyczynski HM, et al. Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral slings for stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(22):2066-76. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0912658.

13. Abufaraj M, Xu T, Cao C, et al. Prevalence and trends in urinary incontinence among women in the United States, 2005–2018. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225(2):166.e1–166.e12. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2021.03.016.

14. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women: management. NG123. Published April 2019; last updated June 2019. Recommendations 1.4.3, 1.4.4-1.4.10 and 1.4.35. Recommendations

15. European Association of Urology. EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) (Limited Update March 2026). Guideline.

16. Sangsawang B, Sangsawang N. Stress urinary incontinence in pregnant women: a review of prevalence, pathophysiology, and treatment. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(6):901-12. doi:10.1007/s00192-013-2061-7.

17. Porcari I, Uccella S, Casprini C, Bosco M, Zorzato PC, Garzon S. Vulvovaginal estrogen therapy for urinary symptoms in postmenopausal women: a review and meta-analysis. Climacteric. 2026;29(1):13-22. doi:10.1080/13697137.2025.2517138

18. Sutcliffe S, Falke C, Fok CS, et al. Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in US Women: Contemporary Prevalence Estimates from the RISE FOR HEALTH Study. J Urol. 2024;212(1):124-135. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000004009

19. Smeets CFA, Vergeldt TFM, Notten KJB, et al. Association between levator ani avulsion and urinary incontinence in women: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2021;153(1):25-32. doi:10.1002/ijgo.13496

20. Arya LA, Myers DL, Jackson ND. Dietary caffeine intake and the risk for detrusor instability: a case-control study. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(1):85-9. doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(00)00808-5

21. Abaza I, Tadros M, Lemmon B, et al. Joint hypermobility syndrome for the urogynaecologist - a narrative review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2026;318:114943. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2026.114943

22. Nager CW, Kraus SR, Kenton K, et al. Urodynamics, the supine empty bladder stress test, and incontinence severity. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(7):1306-1311. doi:10.1002/nau.20836

23. Jha S, Ammenbal M, Metwally M. Impact of incontinence surgery on sexual function: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sex Med. 2012;9(1):34-43. doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02366.x

24. Glass Clark SM, Huang Q, Sima AP, Siff LN. Effect of surgery for stress incontinence on female sexual function. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135(2):352-360. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000003648

25. Blaivas JG, Olsson CA. Stress incontinence: classification and surgical approach. J Urol. 1988;139(4):727-731. doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(17)42611-5

26. Goldberg RP, Abramov Y, Botros S, Miller JJ, Gandhi S, Nickolov A, et al. Delivery mode is a major environmental determinant of stress urinary incontinence: results of the Evanston-Northwestern Twin Sisters Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(6):2149-2153. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2005.08.055

27. Nygaard IE, Shaw JM, Bardsley T, Egger MJ. Lifetime physical activity and female stress urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(1):40.e1-40.e10. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.01.044

28. Subak LL, Wing R, West DS, et al. "Weight loss to treat urinary incontinence in overweight and obese women." N Engl J Med. 2009;360(5):481-490. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0806375

29. Fleischmann N, Chughtai B, Plair A, et al. "Urethral bulking." Urogynecology (Phila). 2024;30(8):667-682. doi:10.1097/SPV.0000000000001548

30. Tähtinen RM, Cartwright R, Tsui JF, et al. "Long-term impact of mode of delivery on stress urinary incontinence and urgency urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis." Eur Urol. 2016;70(1):148-158. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2016.01.037

31. Zhou HH, Shu B, Liu TZ, et al. "Association between parity and the risk for urinary incontinence in women: A meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies." Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97(28):e11443. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000011443

32. DeLancey JOL. "Why do women have stress urinary incontinence?" Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(Suppl 1):S13-S17. doi:10.1002/nau.20888

33. Chang OH, Saldanha IJ, Encalada-Soto D, et al. "Associations between hysterectomy and pelvic floor disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis." Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2025;233(3):141-151.e6. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2025.03.018

34. Akbar A, Liu K, Michos ED, et al. "Racial differences in urinary incontinence prevalence and associated bother: the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis." Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;224(1):80.e1-80.e9. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2020.07.031

35. Woodley SJ, Lawrenson P, Boyle R, et al. "Pelvic floor muscle training for preventing and treating urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women." Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;5:CD007471. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007471.pub4

36. Ghoniem G, Stanford E, Kenton K, et al. "Evaluation and outcome measures in the treatment of female urinary stress incontinence: International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) guidelines for research and clinical practice." Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008;19(1):5-33. doi:10.1007/s00192-007-0495-5

37. Gagnon LH, Edell H, Lee PE. "Diagnosis and management of urinary incontinence in females." CMAJ. 2026;198(20):E769–E775. doi:10.1503/cmaj.241715