Risk factors leading to midurethral sling revision: A multicenter case-control study

Stephanie Molden, Danielle Patterson, Megan Tarr, Tatiana Sanses, Jessica Bracken, Aimee Nguyen, Heide S. Harvie, Amanda White, Sarah A. Hammil, Miles Murphy, Rebecca G. Rogers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

22 Scopus citations


Introduction and hypothesis: To determine risk factors for sling revision after midurethral sling (MUS) placement. Methods: This multicenter case-control study included patients who underwent MUS placement and subsequent revision secondary to voiding dysfunction from January 1999-2007 from nine Urogynecology centers across the USA. Direct logistic regression analysis was used to determine which diagnostic variables predicted sling revision. Results: Of the patients, 197 met the study criteria. Patient demographics, urodynamic findings, and operative differences did not increase the risk for sling revision. Risk factors for sling revision did include: pre-existing voiding symptoms (OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.32-5.79; p=0.004) retropubic sling type (OR=2.28, 95% CI 1.08-4.78; p=0.04) and concurrent surgery (OR=4.88, 95% CI 2.16-11.05; p<0.001) Conclusions: This study determined that pre-existing obstructive voiding symptoms, retropubic sling type, and concurrent surgery at the time of sling placement are risk factors for sling revision.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1253-1259
Number of pages7
JournalInternational Urogynecology Journal
Issue number10
StatePublished - Oct 2010


  • Midurethral sling
  • Sling revision
  • Voiding dysfucntion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Urology


Dive into the research topics of 'Risk factors leading to midurethral sling revision: A multicenter case-control study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this