Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 12, 2026

Transcorporal Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff Placement in a Case Requiring Revision for Urethral Atrophy
Published on: June 16, 2022
Risk factors leading to midurethral sling revision: a multicenter case-control study
Stephanie Molden1, Danielle Patterson, Megan Tarr
1The Institute for Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery, Allentown, PA, USA. smolden@fphcenter.com
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.
Related Concept Videos
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management
Urinary Tract Calculi III: Medical Management
Urinary Tract Calculi II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations

