Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30357298›Full record

ArticleJAMA2018

Long-term Rate of Mesh Sling Removal Following Midurethral Mesh Sling Insertion Among Women With Stress Urinary Incontinence.

Ipek Gurol-Urganci, Rebecca S Geary, Jil B Mamza, Jonathan Duckett, Dina El-Hamamsy, Lucia Dolan, Douglas G Tincello, Jan van der Meulen

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
12.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 122 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Ipek Gurol-UrganciDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Rebecca S GearyDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Jil B MamzaDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Jonathan DuckettMedway Hospital, Gillingham, Kent, United Kingdom.
Dina El-HamamsyLeicester General Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Lucia DolanBelfast City Hospital, Department of Gynaecology, Lisburn Road, Belfast, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom.
Douglas G TincelloUniversity of Leicester, Department of Health Sciences, College of Life Sciences, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Jan van der MeulenDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBBelfast City Hospital · GBLeicester General Hospital · GBMedway Maritime Hospital · GBUniversity of Leicester · GB

Funding

Department of Health HS&DR/14/70/162
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: There is concern about outcomes of midurethral mesh sling insertion for women with stress urinary incontinence. However, there is little evidence on long-term outcomes. Objective: To examine long-term mesh removal and reoperation rates in women who had a midurethral mesh sling insertion for stress urinary incontinence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based retrospective cohort study included 95 057 women aged 18 years or older who had a first-ever midurethral mesh sling insertion for stress urinary incontinence in the National Health Service hospitals in England between April 1, 2006, and December 31, 2015. Women were followed up until April 1, 2016. Exposures: Patient and hospital factors and retropubic or transobturator mesh sling insertions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the risk of midurethral mesh sling removal (partial or total) and secondary outcomes were reoperation for stress urinary incontinence and any reoperation including mesh removal, calculated with death as competing risk. A multivariable Fine-Gray model was used to calculate subdistribution hazard ratios as estimates of relative risk. Results: The study population consisted of 95 057 women (median age, 51 years; interquartile range, 44-61 years) with first midurethral mesh sling insertion, including 60 194 with retropubic insertion and 34 863 with transobturator insertion. The median follow-up time was 5.5 years (interquartile range, 3.2-7.5 years). The rate of midurethral mesh sling removal was 1.4% (95% CI, 1.3%-1.4%) at 1 year, 2.7% (95% CI, 2.6%-2.8%) at 5 years, and 3.3% (95% CI, 3.2%-3.4%) at 9 years. Risk of removal declined with age. The 9-year removal risk after transobturator insertion (2.7% [95% CI, 2.4%-2.9%]) was lower than the risk after retropubic insertion (3.6% [95% CI, 3.5%-3.8%]; subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.62-0.84]). The rate of reoperation for stress urinary incontinence was 1.3% (95% CI, 1.3%-1.4%) at 1 year, 3.5% (95% CI, 3.4%-3.6%) at 5 years, and 4.5% (95% CI, 4.3%-4.7%) at 9 years. The rate of any reoperation, including mesh removal, was 2.6% (95% CI, 2.5%-2.7%) at 1 year, 5.5% (95% CI, 5.4%-5.7%) at 5 years, and 6.9% (95% CI, 6.7%-7.1%) at 9 years. Conclusions and Relevance: Among women undergoing midurethral mesh sling insertion, the rate of mesh sling removal at 9 years was estimated as 3.3%. These findings may guide women and their surgeons when making decisions about surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence.

Indexed as

Suburethral SlingsAdultAgedDevice RemovalEnglandFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansMiddle AgedProportional Hazards ModelsReoperationRetrospective StudiesUrinary Incontinence, Stress

Identifiers

PMID30357298
PMCPMC6233805
OpenAlexW2896331706

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.