A new paradigm for surgical revision of the artificial urinary sphincter for recurrent stress urinary incontinence: Wilson’s Workshop 11

Management Options for Bilateral Vocal Fold Impairment: Scoping Review to Assess the Potential of Soft Robotics Solutions

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aims to comprehensively assess current surgical interventions for bilateral vocal fold paralysis (BVFP), addressing the heterogeneity in treatment outcomes. Additionally, it explores the potential role of soft robotics as an innovative approach to improve outcomes in BVFP management.

METHODS

This scoping review systematically examines literature from MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus databases. Inclusion criteria encompass studies related to BVFP management with measurable subjective or objective outcomes. Studies with populations solely under the age of 18 were excluded. Four reviewers independently screened 2263 studies, resulting in the selection of 125 papers for data extraction. Information included study characteristics, interventions, and outcomes. Data synthesis involved both quantitative and qualitative analyses.

RESULTS

The review identified 145 surgical interventions grouped into seven types: tracheostomy, cordectomy, arytenoidectomy, lateralization, combined procedures and others. Outcome measures fit into the following categories: "objective voice," "subjective voice," "aerodynamics," "dyspnea," "decannulation," "swallow," and "quality of life." Positive outcomes were predominant across all interventions, with arytenoidectomy and cordectomy showing relatively lower rates of successful objective and subjective voice outcomes. This could be the result of prioritizing improved airway status. Soft robotics is hypothesized as a potential solution to the limitation of current interventions sacrificing voice for breathing.

CONCLUSIONS

The main aim of current surgical interventions for BVFP is expanding glottic aperture. Yet achieving optimal outcomes remains elusive due to complex airflow dynamics and potential impacts on phonatory function and swallowing. The current review underscores the need for a more nuanced, personalized approach, considering individual anatomical and physiological variations. Soft robotics emerges as a promising avenue to address this variability. However, challenges such as implantation procedures, long-term care, and patient education require careful consideration. Collaboration between medical professionals, engineers, and robotics specialists is essential for translating these principles into practical solutions.

Which revision strategy is the best for non-mechanical failure of male artificial urinary sphincter?

PURPOSE

Persistence or recurrence of stress urinary incontinence (prSUI) after artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation may be secondary to non-mechanical failure (NOMECA). It have for long been assumed to result from urethral atrophy. Its existence is now debated. As the pathophysiology of NOMECA is not elucidated, the most appropriate management remains unclear. We aimed to compare the several revision techniques for NOMECA of AUS in men.

METHODS

NOMECA was defined as prSUI, with normally functioning device, no erosion, infection or fluid loss. Exclusion criteria were neurogenic SUI, revision or explantation for other causes. From 1991 to 2022, 143 AUS revisions for NOMECA, including 99 cuff DOWNSIZING, 10 cuff repositioning (RELOC), 13 TANDEM-CUFF placement, 18 cuff changing (CHANGE), three increasing balloon pressure (BALLOON-UP), were performed in 10 centers. BALLOON-UP patients weren't included in comparative analysis due to small sample size. All components could be changed during the revision. Patients were also categorized in COMPLETE-CHANGE vs. PARTIAL-CHANGE of the device.

RESULTS

The three-months complete continence rate was 70.8% with a significant difference between RELOC and DOWNSIZING groups (p = 0.04). COMPLETE CHANGE was significantly associated with complete continence status at three months in multivariate analysis (83.3% vs. 63.3%, OR = 2.7; CI 95% [1.1-7.1], p = 0.03). Estimated five-year reoperation-free and explantation-free survival were respectively 63.4% and 75.9% (p = 0.16; p = 0.30). Those were significantly longer in COMPLETE-CHANGE vs PARTIAL-CHANGE (82.2% vs. 69.6%, p = 0.03); (71.2% vs. 58.2%, p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

AUS revision for prSUI due to NOMECA yields satisfactory outcomes regardless of the technique used. We observed better functional outcomes when repositioning the new cuff. COMPLETE-CHANGE may improve functional outcomes, explantation-free and reoperation-free survivals.

First safety outcomes for rigicon conticlassic® artificial urinary sphincter

The Rigicon ContiClassic® is a new sphincteric device designed to treat male stress urinary incontinence. This study evaluates the surgical outcomes and safety profile of the first 116 patients who received the implant between September 2021 and April 2022. Data were collected from patient information forms completed at the time of the implant and submitted by implanting surgeons, nursing staff in the Operating Room or company representatives present during the surgery. The study analyzed patient demographics, surgical details, and etiology of incontinence. The mean age of patients was 68.3 years +/- 9.65 yrs. Minimum age was 23 and maximum age was 83. The most common reason for implantation was urinary incontinence (58.6%) after radical prostatectomy. The results showed a revision rate of 6.90%, with three cases of fluid loss, four cases of iatrogenic mistaken sizing, and one case of patient dissatisfaction. There were no reported infections. Kaplan-Meier calculation showed survival rate of 93.2% at 12 months. This study shows the early safety outcomes for the Rigicon ContiClassic® sphincter device to be comparable to others presently on the market.

Artificial urinary sphincter or a second adjustable transobturator male system offer equivalent outcomes in patients whom required revision on the initial ATOMS device: An international multi-institutional experience

AIM

To evaluate treatment options after surgical revision of adjustable transobturator male system (ATOMS) and the results of further incontinence implantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective multicenter study evaluating patients with surgical revision of ATOMS in academic institutions. Causes and factors affecting revision-free interval were studied and also the frequency of device explant and placement of second ATOMS or artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) at surgeon discretion. Operative results, complications (Clavien-Dindo), and efficacy (postoperative pad-test, pad-count, patient satisfaction, and patient global impression of improvement [PGI-I scale]) of each treatment option were compared.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight out of 902 patients (8.65%) with ATOMS underwent surgical revision at 4.1 ± 2.4 years mean follow-up and 75 (8.3%) were explanted. The main causes for revision included persistence of incontinence (35.9%) and scrotal port erosion (34.6%). Independent risk factors of the shortened revision-free interval were previous anti-incontinence surgery (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.06-3.16; p = 0.007) and port erosion (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.06-3.16; p = 0.0027). Fifty-eight (6.4%) received a second implant: 31 repeated ATOMS and 27 AUS. Operative time was longer for AUS (p = .003). The visual analog scale of pain at hospital discharge (p = 0.837) and postoperative complications (p = 0.154) were equivalent. The predominant cuff size for AUS was 4.5 cm (59.3%). Mean follow-up after the second implant was 29.1 ± 25.8 months. Postoperative efficacy of secondary treatment results favored ATOMS based on pad-test (p = 0.016), pad-count (p = 0.029), patient satisfaction (p = 0.04), and PGI-I (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

ATOMS surgical revision due to different reasons generally leads to device explant. Rescue treatment is possible with ATOMS or AUS. No difference in postoperative complications was detected between secondary devices, but efficacy favors repeating ATOMS implantation.

Twenty years later: is the scrotal one-incision AUS of value?

The artificial urinary sphincter, known as AMS 800, has been the gold standard for treating moderate to severe stress urinary incontinence in males for 40 years. Yet, the number of sphincters done globally is quite small and the majority of urologists doing them are infrequent implanters. Estimates for 2019 showed half of implanters did only one implant that year and worldwide only around 13,000 implantations were performed. The traditional two-incision technique of perineal exposure for cuff placement and abdominal incision for pump and pressure regulating balloon persists as the most common technique to surgically place an artificial urinary sphincter. Present estimates are that upwards of 80% are done via the perineal approach and that approach is the highly favored incision of large volume centers. The scrotal one-incision approach was invented by Wilson 20 years ago and was aimed at making the implantation of a sphincter quicker, easier and safer for the occasional implanter. These physicians perform 1-2 devices per year, comprise 60% of implanters who perform the surgery yearly, and implant 22% of all implanted devices. Our article targets these infrequent inserters discussing the history of the two techniques and what the authors have learned about the advantages and hazards of the one scrotal incision procedure over the last two decades.