Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

PUBOVAGINAL FASCIAL SLING FOR ALL TYPES OF STRESS URINARY INCONTINENCE: LONG-TERM ANALYSIS

CHAIKIN, DAVID C., ROSENTHAL, JARROD, BLAIVAS, JERRY G.·1998·Journal of Urology

Abstract

PURPOSE: There is a lack of consensus regarding indications and long-term efficacy of the many surgical techniques for treating stress incontinence. Historically pubovaginal sling has been reserved for cases of intrinsic sphincter deficiency or prior surgical failure. Transvaginal needle and retropubic suspensions have been used mainly for sphincteric incontinence unassociated with intrinsic sphincter deficiency. We report the long-term results of pubovaginal sling for all types of stress incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 251 consecutive women with all types of stress incontinence who underwent pubovaginal fascial sling by a single surgeon were retrospectively and prospectively reviewed. Patients were evaluated preoperatively with history, physical examination, standardized symptom questionnaire, voiding diary, pad test, uroflow, post-void residual urine, video urodynamics and cystoscopy. Postoperatively women with at least 1-year followup were assessed by an independent third party (J. R.) who had no prior knowledge of them, and who recorded the parameters of the questionnaire, examination with a full bladder, voiding diary, pad test, uroflow and post-void residual urine. RESULTS: Overall stress incontinence was cured or improved in 92% of the patients with at least 1-year followup (median 3.1 years, range 1 to 15). The majority of patients with postoperative incontinence had de novo (3%) or persistent (23%) urge incontinence. Permanent urinary retention developed in 4 patients (2%). CONCLUSIONS: Fascial pubovaginal sling is an effective treatment for all types of stress incontinence with acceptable long-term efficacy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)62524-2

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 358

Metadata

Authors
CHAIKIN, D. C., ROSENTHAL, J., & BLAIVAS, J. G.
Venue
Journal of Urology
Published
1998-10
Volume
160
Issue
4
Pages
1312-1316
ISSN
  • 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-3792
OpenAlex
W2107447257
Cited by
358
References
6
FWCI
18.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: PUBOVAGINAL FASCIAL SLING FOR ALL TYPES OF STRESS URINARY INCONTINENCE: LONG-TERM ANALYSIS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0022-5347(01)62524-2
The paper
CHAIKIN, D. C., ROSENTHAL, J., & BLAIVAS, J. G. (1998). PUBOVAGINAL FASCIAL SLING FOR ALL TYPES OF STRESS URINARY INCONTINENCE: LONG-TERM ANALYSIS. Journal of Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(01)62524-2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.