ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Sonography as a Diagnostic Tool in Midurethral Sling Complications: A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transrectal Biplane Ultrasound Combined with Cotton Swab Marking of the External Urethral Orifice for Evaluating the Postoperative Position of Transobturator Mid-Urethral Sling: A Study on Standardized Ultrasound Measurement and Inter-Observer Reliability.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the efficacy of mini-sling in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence through patient-reported outcomes and transperineal ultrasonography.Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the established safety and efficacy of midurethral slings (MUS), which are the current gold standard treatment for stress urinary incontinence (SUI), the potential for postoperative complications remains a significant concern for both healthcare professionals and patients. Meanwhile, sonography has emerged as a significant diagnostic tool in urogynecology, and one of the applications of this imaging modality may be the evaluation of complications arising from MUS procedures. This review, based on a comprehensive literature search, focuses on the use of pelvic floor ultrasound (US) in the context of MUS complications. It includes analyses of randomized controlled trials, prospective, and retrospective studies, covering preoperative and postoperative investigations, to assess complications such as persistent and recurrent SUI, urinary retention and obstructive voiding, de novo urgency/overactive bladder, vaginal exposure, sling erosion, pain, and hematoma. The review critically examines the existing literature, with a particular focus on recent publications. Despite the variability in findings, it appears that for each of the discussed complications, the application of pelvic floor US can significantly support the diagnostic and therapeutic process. The paper also identifies potential future directions for the development of US applications in diagnosing MUS complications.
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.