Standard

Cystourethroscopy following midurethral slings: is it always necessary? / Melon, Jerome; Kelly, Erin C.; van Delft, Kim W. M.

In: International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2018, p. 789-793.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Harvard

Melon, J, Kelly, EC & van Delft, KWM 2018, 'Cystourethroscopy following midurethral slings: is it always necessary?', International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 789-793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3611-9

APA

Melon, J., Kelly, E. C., & van Delft, K. W. M. (2018). Cystourethroscopy following midurethral slings: is it always necessary? International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction, 29(6), 789-793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3611-9

Vancouver

Melon J, Kelly EC, van Delft KWM. Cystourethroscopy following midurethral slings: is it always necessary? International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction. 2018;29(6):789-793. doi: 10.1007/s00192-018-3611-9

Author

Melon, Jerome ; Kelly, Erin C. ; van Delft, Kim W. M. / Cystourethroscopy following midurethral slings: is it always necessary?. In: International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction. 2018 ; Vol. 29, No. 6. pp. 789-793.

BibTeX

@article{befded785d9843a6952cea4311acb5a0,
title = "Cystourethroscopy following midurethral slings: is it always necessary?",
abstract = "Midurethral slings are the mainstay of treatment for stress urinary incontinence. The role of cystourethroscopy to detect lower urinary tract injury following retropubic midurethral slings is well-established; however, its role following transobturator or single-incision sling placement remains controversial. Some advocate “routine” whereas others advocate for “selective” cystourethroscopy. This paper reviews the arguments for and against cystourethroscopy to detect lower urinary tract injury following transobturator and single-incision slings.",
author = "Jerome Melon and Kelly, {Erin C.} and {van Delft}, {Kim W. M.}",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1007/s00192-018-3611-9",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "789--793",
journal = "International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction",
issn = "0937-3462",
publisher = "Springer London",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cystourethroscopy following midurethral slings: is it always necessary?

AU - Melon, Jerome

AU - Kelly, Erin C.

AU - van Delft, Kim W. M.

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Midurethral slings are the mainstay of treatment for stress urinary incontinence. The role of cystourethroscopy to detect lower urinary tract injury following retropubic midurethral slings is well-established; however, its role following transobturator or single-incision sling placement remains controversial. Some advocate “routine” whereas others advocate for “selective” cystourethroscopy. This paper reviews the arguments for and against cystourethroscopy to detect lower urinary tract injury following transobturator and single-incision slings.

AB - Midurethral slings are the mainstay of treatment for stress urinary incontinence. The role of cystourethroscopy to detect lower urinary tract injury following retropubic midurethral slings is well-established; however, its role following transobturator or single-incision sling placement remains controversial. Some advocate “routine” whereas others advocate for “selective” cystourethroscopy. This paper reviews the arguments for and against cystourethroscopy to detect lower urinary tract injury following transobturator and single-incision slings.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85044188523&origin=inward

UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29564509

U2 - 10.1007/s00192-018-3611-9

DO - 10.1007/s00192-018-3611-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 29564509

VL - 29

SP - 789

EP - 793

JO - International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction

JF - International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction

SN - 0937-3462

IS - 6

ER -

ID: 5620140