ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2026
The developing field of meshology - what is new in the management of mesh complications in female incontinence and prolapse - a systematic review of outcomes.
Review in International journal of impotence research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Women having mesh procedures may require revision surgery in the long term due to complications. In the past decade, the field has evolved, moving towards specialist mesh centres. This systematic review analyses indications for treatment, whether complete mesh removal was achieved and treatment outcomes for delayed mesh complications. Fifty-six studies involving 4480 patients were identified from 2015 to 2025, to our knowledge, making this the largest systematic review of mesh complications in the modern era. Pain is the most common reason for seeking treatment for mesh complications and is present in up to 49-68% of women. Isolated surgical treatment for pain in the absence of anatomical abnormalities has poorer outcomes and often requires a holistic approach with specialist pain input. Asymptomatic vaginal exposure of under 1 cm can be treated with topical oestrogen with excellent success rates in selected patients. Endoscopic treatment for urethral extrusion has a 3% risk of urethrovaginal fistula. The risk of de novo incontinence is higher when the sub-urethral component of the mesh is removed compared to mesh arms (odds ratio 10.7). In large series, 15.6% of patients stayed in hospital for over 2 days after mesh removal, with a 2.8-13.7% incidence of >Clavien 3 complications. Robotic mesh removal surgery is an emerging approach and may play an important role, particularly when additional procedures are required, such as ureteric reconstruction and colposuspension.
Identifiers
42443632What 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.