ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2019
Outcomes after laparoscopic removal of retropubic midurethral slings for chronic pain.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Midurethral Sling Surgery: Impacts on Sexual Function and Approaches to Complications.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- 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
- The management of vaginal prolapse and stress incontinence mesh complications in a quaternary mesh complications service in the United Kingdom (U.K): a 5-year observational study.BMC women's health · 2025Observational
- Presentation and management of urethral erosion caused by mid-urethral sling.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Article
- Unilateral J-cut division versus partial and subtotal removal techniques in female patients with mesh-related urethral obstruction: Multicentric comparative study.BJUI compass · 2024Article
- Total trans-obturator tape (TOT) removal; a case series including pain and urinary continence outcomes.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- Management of post-operative urinary incontinence after midurethral sling explantation for pelvic or perineal pain.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic removal of a synthetic retropubic mid-urethral sling (tension-free vaginal tape): step-by-step technique.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic removal of intravesically inserted transobturator tape.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Host-biomaterial interactions in mesh complications after pelvic floor reconstructive surgery.Nature reviews. Urology · 2021Review
- A novel technique for complete laparoscopic excision of a transobturator sling with lower urinary tract mesh erosion.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
- Management of complications arising from the use of mesh for stress urinary incontinence-International Urogynecology Association Research and Development Committee opinion.International urogynecology journal · 2019Review
- A laparoscopic technique for excision of retropubic midurethral sling arms eroding into the bladder.International urogynecology journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisMidurethral slings (MUS) are an established treatment for stress urinary incontinence (SUI), with good objective outcomes and low rates of complications. However, large population-based registry studies highlighted long-term complications from polypropylene slings including erosion, dyspareunia and chronic pain. With recent highly negative media coverage, many women are presenting with chronic pain attributed to the mesh to request complete removal. The available literature provides limited evidence on safety, symptom resolution and incontinence following MUS removal.
methodsWe identified all patients who underwent laparoscopic removal of MUS mesh at our hospital between 2011 and 2016. We extracted data from medical records to assess operative safety and contacted all patients by questionnaire that incorporated pain scales, symptom severity and satisfaction.
resultsA total of 56 women were assessed. Removal occurred at a median of 44 months following sling insertion (range 3-192). Mean operative time was 74 min (range 44-132). Two patients were returned to theatre (one at 24 hours and one at 14 days) to evacuate a retropubic haematoma, but no visceral injuries occurred. The median inpatient stay was 2 days (range 1-7). Of the 46% of patients who returned the questionnaire (n = 26), 88% said they would recommend the procedure. There was a median 6-point decrease in pain scores (10-point numerical scale, p < 0.0001); 44.6% reported worsening SUI, more common with removal of the suburethral mesh [odds ratio (OR) 10.72 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-104].
conclusionsLaparoscopic removal of MUS is feasible and effective but carries a risk of worsening SUI.
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.