“U-Method” TVT-Secur Slings: Are they obstructive?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The TVT-Secur, a single incision sling, was introduced in 2006.It is implanted using either the "hammock" or the "U-method" technique.With the latter, the sling is tightened to create a "pillowing effect" on the urethra until a negative stress test is obtained.Short-term results seem promising.However, no study has ever reported on the voiding pattern 12 months after its implantation.Our objective was to assess whether the "U-method" technique creates an obstructive voiding pattern on pressure-flow study (PFS) 12 months after the surgery.Methods: In this retrospective study, we reviewed the charts of 33 women who underwent the "U-method" TVT-Secur.Patients were evaluated before and 12 months postoperatively with regard to different urodynamic studies (UDS).The incontinence status was also assessed 12 months after surgery.Results: At 12 months after the operation, 12.5% (4/32) of the patients reported an improvement of their stress urinary incontinence, while 78.1% (25/32) reported being cured from it.The objective cure rate was 63% (19/30).One patient had a suspected bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) based on PFS.Maximal flow rate (Q max ) was significantly lower 12 months after surgery (26.0 mL/s [range: 19.0-36.5] vs. 21.5 mL/s [range: 16.0-32.3]).However, median voided volume was lower on the postoperative uroflowmetry (446 mL [range: 348-605] vs. 320 mL [range: 243-502]).Furthermore, none of the patients complained of voiding symptoms after surgery.Conclusions: Although one patient had findings compatible with BOO, none complained of voiding symptoms.TVT-Secur may result in a lower Q max .However, this finding may be due to a lower voiding volume on the postoperative UDS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".