ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2015
The management of massive haematomas after insertion of retropubic mid-urethral slings.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventional radiology in the management of vascular complications in urogynecology: a lower-extremity hematoma after transobturator sling-case report.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Management of massive retropubic haematoma post-TVT.International urogynecology journal · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe retropubic mid-urethral sling (MUS) is the most commonly performed procedure for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence and is associated with a low risk of complications. Large retropubic haematomas occur sporadically and may have life-threatening consequences. Because of their infrequent nature, there is a dearth of information regarding this serious complication. The aim of this study was to identify the incidence of large haematomas and any lessons learnt from their treatment.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted between December 1999 and June 2014. Massive haematoma was defined as a haematoma greater than 8 cm and/or a drop in haemoglobin of more than 4 g/dl. The hospital notes of all patients diagnosed with a massive haematoma were reviewed and a detailed history, operation details and the information on the management of haematoma were obtained.
resultsSeven (0.33 %) patients were identified with a massive retropubic haematoma out of a total of 2,091 retropubic MUS procedures performed. Six patients presented acutely with symptoms within 24 h. Haemoglobin levels dropped on average by 5.7 g/dl (range 2.9 to 8.6). The size of the haematoma ranged from 8 to 12 cm in diameter. Six patients required surgical drainage of the haematoma. Three patients received evacuation within 2 post-operative days. Haematomas were removed via laparotomy, vaginal drainage or suprapubic drainage.
conclusionsMassive retropubic haematomas are uncommon but serious complications of MUS procedures. Our experience suggests that to reduce short- and long-term complications, early evacuation of massive haematomas via the suprapubic approach is recommended.
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.