ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2015
Three-dimensional analysis of implanted magnetic-resonance-visible meshes.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Magnetic resonance imaging for visualization, segmentation and 3D reconstruction of surgical meshes in the lower abdomen: a systematic review.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Profiling of the macrophage response to polypropylene mesh burden in vivo.Biomaterials · 2025Article
- Ultrasound visualization of sacrocolpopexy polyvinylidene fluoride meshes containing paramagnetic Fe particles compared with polypropylene mesh.International urogynecology journal · 2019Article
- 3D reconstruction of MR-visible FeNeurourology and urodynamics · 2019Article
- MRI visible FeInternational urogynecology journal · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOur primary objective was to develop relevant algorithms for quantification of mesh position and 3D shape in magnetic resonance (MR) images.
methodsIn this proof-of-principle study, one patient with severe anterior vaginal wall prolapse was implanted with an MR-visible mesh. High-resolution MR images of the pelvis were acquired 6 weeks and 8 months postsurgery. 3D models were created using semiautomatic segmentation techniques. Conformational changes were recorded quantitatively using part-comparison analysis. An ellipticity measure is proposed to record longitudinal conformational changes in the mesh arms. The surface that is the effective reinforcement provided by the mesh is calculated using a novel methodology. The area of this surface is the effective support area (ESA).
resultsMR-visible mesh was clearly outlined in the images, which allowed us to longitudinally quantify mesh configuration between 6 weeks and 8 months after implantation. No significant changes were found in mesh position, effective support area, conformation of the mesh's main body, and arm length during the period of observation. Ellipticity profiles show longitudinal conformational changes in posterior arms.
conclusionsThis paper proposes novel methodologies for a systematic 3D assessment of the position and morphology of MR-visible meshes. A novel semiautomatic tool was developed to calculate the effective area of support provided by the mesh, a potentially clinically important parameter.
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.