ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2016
Indications and risk factors for midurethral sling revision.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- The developing field of meshology - what is new in the management of mesh complications in female incontinence and prolapse - a systematic review of outcomes.International journal of impotence research · 2026Review
- Mesh Extraction Surgery and Laser Treatment for Pain After Mid-Urethral Sling Surgery: A Case Series.Cureus · 2024Article
- Urethral Mesh Assessment in Cancer Patients.Cancers · 2023Review
- Urodynamic and urethral pressure profilometry findings in women with voiding phase dysfunction treated with surgical urethrolysis.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2023Article
- Risk factors for stress urinary incontinence recurrence after midurethral sling revision.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2023Article
- Pain resolution and functional outcomes of total mesh excision: a case series.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- Sexual Activity and Dyspareunia After Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery: A 5-Year Nationwide Follow-up Study.European urology open science · 2022Article
- 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
- A comprehensive look at risk factors for mid-urethral sling revision surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- What is your diagnosis?Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2019Article
- Readmission and reoperation after midurethral sling.International urogynecology journal · 2018Article
- Quality of life and objective outcome assessment in women with tape division after surgery for stress urinary incontinence.PloS one · 2017Article
- The Outcome of Repeated Mid Urethral Sling in SUI Treatment after Vaginal Excisions of Primary Failed Sling: Preliminary Study.BioMed research international · 2016Article
- Characterization of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Before and After Midurethral Sling Revision.Journal of minimally invasive gynecologyArticle
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 hypothesisTo determine the indications and risk factors for needing midurethral sling revision in a cohort of women undergoing midurethral sling placement.
methodsThis was a case-control study of all women undergoing midurethral sling placement for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) between January 2003 and December 2013. Cases were patients who underwent midurethral sling placement followed by sling revision (incision, partial or complete excision). Controls were patients who underwent sling placement only. Once all subjects had been identified, the electronic medical record was queried for demographic and perioperative and postoperative data.
resultsOf 3,307 women who underwent sling placement, 89 (2.7%, 95% CI 1.9 - 3.4) underwent sling revision for one or more of the following indications: urinary retention (43.8%), voiding dysfunction (42.7%), recurrent urinary tract infection (20.2%), mesh erosion (21.3%), vaginal pain/dyspareunia (7.9%), and groin pain (3.4%). The median time from the index to the revision surgery was 7.8 months (2.3 - 17.9 months), but was significantly shorter in patients with urinary retention. The type of sling placed (retropubic or transobturator) was not associated with indication for revision. Patients who underwent revision surgery were more likely to have had previous SUI surgery (adjusted odds ratio 4.4, 95% CI 1.7 - 6.5) and to have undergone concomitant vaginal apical suspension (adjusted odds ratio 2.4, 95% CI 1.4 - 4.5).
conclusionsThe rate of sling revision after midurethral sling placement was 2.7%. Urinary retention and voiding dysfunction were the most common indications. Patients with a history of previous SUI surgery and concomitant apical suspension at the time of sling placement may be at higher risk of requiring revision surgery.
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.