Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26282209›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2015

Safety considerations for synthetic sling surgery.

Jerry G Blaivas, Rajveer S Purohit, Matthew S Benedon, Gabriel Mekel, Michael Stern, Mubashir Billah, Kola Olugbade, Robert Bendavid, Vladimir Iakovlev

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 2024 Canadian Urological Association guideline: Female stress urinary incontinence.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Cognitive models for mentally visualizing a sharp instrument in a blind procedure.Global surgical education : journal of the Association for Surgical Education · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Jerry G BlaivasDepartment of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, 445 East 77th Street, New York, NY 10075, USA.
Rajveer S PurohitDepartment of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, 445 East 77th Street, New York, NY 10075, USA.
Matthew S BenedonInstitute for Bladder and Prostate Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, 445 East 77th Street, New York, NY 10075, USA.
Gabriel MekelHahnemann University Hospital, 230 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA 19102, USA.
Michael SternSUNY Downstate College of Medicine, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.
Mubashir BillahSUNY Downstate College of Medicine, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.
Kola OlugbadeSUNY Downstate Medical Center, 450 Clarkson Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.
Robert BendavidShouldice Hospital, 7750 Bayview Avenue, Thornhill, ON L3T 4A3, Canada.
Vladimir IakovlevSt Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, 30 Bond Street, ON M5B 1W8, Canada.
Cornell University · USSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University · USHahnemann University Hospital · USSt. Michael's Hospital · CAThornhill Medical (Canada) · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implantation of a synthetic midurethral sling (SMUS) is the most commonly performed anti-incontinence operation in women worldwide. The effectiveness of the SMUS is comparable to that of the historical gold standards--autologous fascial slings and the Burch colposuspension. Much controversy, however, has evolved regarding the safety of this type of sling. Overall, the quality of the studies with respect to assessing risks of SMUS-associated complications is currently poor. The most common risks in patients with SMUS include urethral obstruction requiring surgery (2.3% of patients with SMUS), vaginal, bladder and/or urethral erosion requiring surgery (1.8%) and refractory chronic pain (4.1%); these data likely represent the minimum risks. In addition, the failure rate of SMUS implantation surgery is probably at least 5% in patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Furthermore, at least one-third of patients undergoing sling excision surgery develop recurrent SUI. Considering the additional risks of refractory overactive bladder, fistulas and bowel perforations, among others, the overall risk of a negative outcome after SMUS implantation surgery is ≥15%.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansPolypropylenesPostoperative ComplicationsProsthesis DesignProsthesis FailureSuburethral SlingsSurgical MeshUrinary Incontinence, StressPolypropylenes

Identifiers

PMID26282209
OpenAlexW2231877962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.