ArticleUrology2022
Symptom Resolution and Recurrent Urinary Incontinence Following Removal of Painful Midurethral Slings.
Article in Urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Midurethral Sling Surgery: Impacts on Sexual Function and Approaches to Complications.International urogynecology journal · 2026Review
- Robotic midurethral sling removal: surgical technique and outcomes of a single center series.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- One and five-year efficacy of tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) abbrevo and TVT-obturator in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence: a retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate pain improvement and recurrent stress incontinence (SUI) following painful synthetic midurethral sling (MUS) removal.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent synthetic MUS removal at our institution from 2009-2016 for the indication of pain. We recorded sling type (transobturator vs retropubic), complete vs partial removal, and presenting symptoms. Postoperative pain improvement was categorized as resolved (pain resolved, requiring no further therapy), improved (pain less bothersome, may require further therapy), or unresolved (no/minimal improvement, requiring further management). Recurrent incontinence and further reconstructive procedures were assessed.
results87 patients (49 complete and 38 partial removal) with pain as the primary indication for removal were included. Median age at intervention was 54 years with median follow-up of 8 months. Overall, pain improved or resolved in 78.1% of cases. Complete removal was associated with significantly greater percentage of pain resolution (63.3%) compared to partial removal (26.3%) (P = 0.002) regardless of sling type. No significant differences in recurrent SUI were noted in complete vs partial removal. Additional reconstructive procedures were performed in 28 patients, most commonly sling placement, with no significant difference in complete (20.4%) vs partial (28.9%) removal groups (P = 0.36). The overall complication rate was low (5.7%), a majority of which were transfusions (4.6%).
conclusionFollowing MUS removal, most patients experienced resolution or improvement of pain. Complete sling removal was associated with significantly greater percentage of pain resolution compared to partial removal in both retropubic and transobturator slings. Rates of recurrent SUI and reintervention for SUI were not related to the extent of sling removal.
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.