Nitya Abraham

Dr. Nitya Abraham

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 April 2019 in Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KMKeneta Mckellar
Keneta Mckellar
EBEran Bellin
Eran Bellin
ESEllie Schoenbaum
Ellie Schoenbaum
NANitya Abraham
Nitya Abraham

1 November 2014 in Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
UNUmaphorn Nuanthaisong
Umaphorn Nuanthaisong
NANitya Abraham
Nitya Abraham
HGHoward B. Goldman
Howard B. Goldman

28 January 2019 in Neurourology and Urodynamics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
KMKeneta Mckellar
Keneta Mckellar
NANitya Abraham
Nitya Abraham

1 August 2021 in Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
AHAmber S. Herbert
Amber S. Herbert
ANAmy Nemirovsky
Amy Nemirovsky
DHDeborah S. Hess
Deborah S. Hess
DWDawn Walter
Dawn Walter
NANitya Abraham
Nitya Abraham
RMRena D. Malik
Rena D. Malik

1 February 2019 in Urologic Clinics of North America
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EMElishia McKay
Elishia McKay
KWKara Watts
Kara Watts
NANitya Abraham
Nitya Abraham

1 August 2016 in Journal of Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ICIryna M. Crescenze
Iryna M. Crescenze
NANitya Abraham
Nitya Abraham
JLJianbo Li
Jianbo Li
HGHoward B. Goldman
Howard B. Goldman
SVSandip Vasavada
Sandip Vasavada
We evaluate urgency urinary incontinence outcomes for patients who underwent revision of a presumed obstructing synthetic mid urethral sling and examine risk factors for persistent or de novo symptoms after surgery. From February 1, 2005 to June 1, 2013, 107 women underwent sling revision for new or worsening lower urinary tract symptoms after synthetic mid urethral sling surgery. Patients were grouped based on urgency urinary incontinence symptoms and characteristics associated with persistent or de novo symptoms after revision were examined using logistic regression models. Median followup was 29 months (IQR 12-54) and time to revision was 21 months (IQR 5-48). Patients presenting for sling revision with urgency incontinence (68) were more likely to experience a more than 6-month delay to revision vs those presenting with obstructive voiding symptoms (39) (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.33-7.92, p <0.01). After revision urgency incontinence persisted in 76.5% (52 of 68) and was associated with a pre-revision need for anticholinergic medication (OR 5.58, 95% CI 1.44-21.39, p=0.01) and smoking (OR 5.21, 95% CI 1.21-22.49, p=0.03). De novo urgency incontinence developed in 43.6% (17 of 39) of patients and was associated with de novo stress incontinence (OR 15.9, 95% CI 3.2-78.3, p <0.01). Women with post-revision urgency incontinence (de novo or persistent) had higher Urogenital Distress Inventory-6 scores than patients with no or resolution of urgency incontinence. Patients presenting with new or worsening urgency urinary incontinence after sling placement were more likely to undergo delayed revision compared to those presenting with obstructive voiding symptoms. There is a high rate of bothersome persistent and de novo urgency incontinence after sling revision. Patient expectations should be managed accordingly before sling revision.