Endoscopic management of intraurethral mesh extrusion with the holmium:YAG laser is an acceptable treatment option in selected patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Extrusion of transvaginal mesh into the urethra is a rare but potentially serious complication. Our objective is to evaluate the efficacy and long-term outcomes of women who underwent an endoscopic laser procedure to treat intraurethral mesh. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified women who underwent an endoscopic Holmium:YAG laser procedure to treat intraurethral mesh between September 2011-October 2021. Information about the procedure, symptoms, and level of incontinence was gathered from the medical records. Primary outcomes were the need for further procedures, and the Urinary Distress Index-6 score at last follow-up. RESULTS: We identified a total of 29 women; mesh sling procedure included tension-free vaginal sling (19), transobturator sling (6), or other transvaginal mesh sling (4). Presentation of intraurethral mesh was a median of 6 (interquartile range [IQR]: 1-7) years after placement. After the endoscopic procedure, 18/29 (62%) women had no visible urinary mesh and complete resolution of their presenting symptoms. Retreatment was necessary in 3/29 women, and 6/29 (21%) reported new or worsening stress incontinence. The UDI-6 was completed by all patients at a median of 3.7 (IQR: 2.0-5.8) years after their endoscopic procedure. The median score was 22 (IQR: 11-44), and 18/29 (62%) women had scores in the asymptomatic range. UDI-6 scores were similar for the six women who had further mesh procedures and the ones who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic laser treatment of an eroded transvaginal mesh sling is an acceptable treatment with minimal morbidity and satisfactory UDI-6 scores after a median follow-up of 3.7 years.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".