ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2013
Sling revision/removal for mesh erosion and urinary retention: long-term risk and predictors.
Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 106 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of surgeon operative volume on risk of reoperation within 5 years of mid-urethral sling: a systematic review.International urogynecology journal · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of synthetic mesh erosion and chronic pain rates after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review.International urogynecology journal · 2021Pooled it
- Two Intraoperative Techniques for Midurethral Sling Tensioning: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2020Trial
- The Long-Term Rate of Reoperation After Midurethral Sling Insertion Among Women With Urinary Incontinence: A Population-Based Study.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Long-term sexual function after mid-urethral slings for stress urinary incontinence in women.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Observational
- Midurethral Sling Mesh Exposure Confers a High Risk of Persistent Stress Urinary Incontinence.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Risk factors for 5-year complications after midurethral sling surgery for stress urinary incontinence: a retrospective cohort study from Taiwan.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Retropubic slings are more efficient than transobturator at 10-year follow-up: a Swedish register-based study.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- Reoperation rates of stress incontinence surgery in rural vs urban hospitals.AJOG global reports · 2022Article
- Mortality and Reoperation Following Midurethral Sling Versus Urethral Bulking in Older Women.Urology · 2022Article
- Long-Term Outcomes After Midurethral Mesh Sling Surgery for Stress Urinary Incontinence.Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery · 2022Article
- Second-Line Surgical Management After Midurethral Sling Failure.International neurourology journal · 2021Article
- The Development of Equipment to Measure Mesh Erosion of Soft Tissue.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Pain after midurethral sling; the underestimated role of mesh removal.Central European journal of urology · 2021Article
- Risk Factors for Returning to the Operating Room for a Second Surgery After Midurethral Sling for Stress Urinary Incontinence.Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery · 2020Article
- Balancing the possibility of needing a future incontinence procedure versus a future urethral sling revision surgery: a tradeoff analysis for continent women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- A comprehensive look at risk factors for mid-urethral sling revision surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- FPMRS challenges on behalf of the Collaborative Research in Pelvic Surgery Consortium (CoRPS): managing complicated cases series 4: is taking out all of a mesh sling too extreme?International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Outcomes after laparoscopic removal of retropubic midurethral slings for chronic pain.International urogynecology journal · 2019Article
- Evaluation of the Effect of Surgeon's Operative Volume and Specialty on Likelihood of Revision After Mesh Midurethral Sling Placement.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of the study was to estimate the long-term risk of sling revision/removal after an initial sling and to assess indications (mesh erosion and urinary retention) and predictors of sling revision/removal. STUDY
designUsing a population-based cohort of commercially insured individuals, we identified women 18 years old or older who underwent a sling (Current Procedural Terminology code 57288) between 2001 and 2010 and any subsequent sling revision/removal (Current Procedural Terminology code 57287). We estimated the cumulative risk of revision/removal annually and evaluated predictors of sling revision/removal using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox proportional hazards models, respectively.
resultsWe identified 188,454 eligible women who underwent an index sling. The 9 year cumulative risk of sling revision/removal was 3.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.5-3.9). At 1 year, this risk was already 2.2% and then increased to 3.2% at 4 years before plateauing. With regard to the indication for the sling revision/removal, a greater proportion was due to mesh erosion compared with urinary retention, with a 9 year risk of 2.5% (95% CI, 2.3-2.6) for mesh erosion vs 1.3% (95% CI, 1.2-1.4) for urinary retention. Age had an effect on the revision/removal rates for both mesh erosion and urinary retention, with the higher risks among those aged 18-29 years. The risk of revision/removal for mesh erosion and urinary retention was also elevated among women who had a concomitant anterior or apical prolapse procedure.
conclusionIn this population-based analysis, the 9 year risk of sling revision/removal was relatively low at 3.7%, with 60% of revisions/removals caused by mesh erosion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.