↓ Skip to main content

The IUGA/ICS classification of synthetic mesh complications in female pelvic floor reconstructive surgery: a multicenter study

Overview of attention for article published in International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
The IUGA/ICS classification of synthetic mesh complications in female pelvic floor reconstructive surgery: a multicenter study
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00192-015-2913-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

John R. Miklos, Orawee Chinthakanan, Robert D. Moore, Gretchen K. Mitchell, Sheena Favors, Deborah R. Karp, Gina M. Northington, Gladys M. Nogueiras, G. Willy Davila

Abstract

The objective was to report patterns of sling and transvaginal mesh-related complications using the IUGA/ICS classification of prosthesis-related complications. This was a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent surgical removal of sling, transvaginal mesh, and sacrocolpopexy for mesh-related complications from 2011 to 2013 at three tertiary referral centers. The International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) classification system was utilized. We identified 445 patients with mesh complications, 506 pieces of synthetic mesh were removed, and 587 prostheses-related complications were classified. 3.7 % of patients had viscus organ penetration or vaginal exposure as their presenting chief complaint and 59.7 % were classified as not having any vaginal epithelial separation or category 1. The most common category was spontaneous pain (1Be: 32.5 %) followed by dyspareunia (1Bc: 14.7 %). The sling group was 20 % more likely to have pain compared with the pelvic organ prolapse (POP) mesh group (OR 1.2, 95 % CI 0.8-1.6). The most commonly affected site (S2) was away from the suture line (49 %). Compared with the sling group, the POP group had a higher rate of mesh exposure, which mostly occurred at the suture line area. The majority of patients presented with mesh-related complications more than 1 year post-insertion (T4; average 3.68 ± 2.47 years). Surgeons should be aware that patients with vaginal mesh complications routinely exhibit complications more than 1 year after the implantation with pain as the most common presenting symptom.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Other 11 26%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 65%
Engineering 2 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Unknown 11 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 March 2019.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#888
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,727
of 396,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#20
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,009 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.