Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25973423›Full record

ReviewBioMed research international2015

Complications following Tension-Free Vaginal Tapes: Accurate Diagnosis and Complications Management.

J Kociszewski, S Kolben, D Barski, V Viereck, E Barcz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioMed research international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Management of mid-urethral tape complications: a retrospective study.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2020
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Ultrasound in Female Urinary Incontinence.Journal of medical ultrasound
    Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

J KociszewskiDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Lutheran Hospital Hagen-Haspe, Brusebrinkstraße 20, 58135 Hagen, Germany.
S KolbenDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Lutheran Hospital Hagen-Haspe, Brusebrinkstraße 20, 58135 Hagen, Germany.
D BarskiDepartment of Urology, Lukas Hospital, Preussenstraße 84, 41464 Neuss, Germany.
V ViereckDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Cantonal Hospital, Pfaffenholzstraße 4, 8501 Frauenfeld, Switzerland.
E BarczDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Warsaw, Żwirki i Wigury 61, 02-091 Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sling procedures are the gold standard for SUI treatment. They are highly effective but not free from complications. The most common adverse effect for the surgery with the implant insertion is: overactive bladder occurring de novo after the surgery, voiding dysfunctions, urine retention, and unsatisfactory treatment outcome. The most important question that arises after 20 years of sling procedures is how to manage the complications and what can be offered to complicated patients. The above review summarises the ultrasound findings in complicated cases and shows the scheme of management of the clinical problems concerning the tape location in suburethral region.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansPelvic FloorSuburethral SlingsTreatment OutcomeUltrasonographyUrinary Incontinence, Stress

Identifiers

PMID25973423
PMCPMC4418011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.