Artificial urinary sphincter for post-prostatectomy incontinence in men who had prior radiotherapy: a risk and outcome analysis

Impact of Radiation Therapy on Outcomes of Artificial Urinary Sphincter: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

To compare incontinence rates and complications in patients receiving artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) with or without radiotherapy (RT).

Methods

PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar databases were searched for studies comparing outcomes of AUS between patients with and without RT. Search limits were from 1st January 2002 to 15th September 2021.

Results

Eighteen studies were included. Meta-analysis revealed statistically significant reduced odds of the absence of incontinence in the RT group (OR: 0.35 95% CI: 0.21, 0.59 I2 = 51% p < 0.0001) as compared to the no-RT group. We also noted statistically significant increased risk of revision surgery in the RT group (OR: 1.74 95% CI: 1.16, 2.60 I2 = 73% p = 0.07). There was increased risk of infections (OR: 2.51 95% CI: 1.00, 6.29 I2 = 46% p = 0.05) and erosions (OR: 2.00 95% CI: 1.15, 3.45 I2 = 21% p = 0.01) in the RT group, but the difference was significant only for erosions. Meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant increased risk of explantation in patients with RT (OR: 3.00 95% CI: 1.16, 7.75 I2 = 68% p = 0.02) but there was no difference in the risk of urethral atrophy (OR: 1.18 95% CI: 0.47, 2.94 I2 = 46% p = 0.72) and mechanical failure (OR: 0.90 95% CI: 0.25, 3.27 I2 = 54% p = 0.87) between the two groups.

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis of recent studies indicates that RT significantly reduces the odds of achieving complete continence after AUS placement. History of RT does not increase the risk urethral atrophy or mechanical failure in patients with AUS. However, the risk of revision surgery, erosions and explantations is significantly increased in patients with RT with a non-significant but increased tendency of infections.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: NCT02612389.

Predicting success after artificial urinary sphincter: which preoperative factors drive patient satisfaction postoperatively?

Background

To determine which preoperative factors drive patient-reported quality of life (QoL) after artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation.

Methods

Men receiving AUS after prostate cancer treatment were identified from a prospectively collected dataset. Preoperative factors were recorded during the initial incontinence consultation. Patients underwent urodynamic testing (UDS) preoperatively at surgeon discretion. Patients were surveyed by telephone postoperatively and given the EPIC Urinary Domain (EPIC-UD) and Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI-6) questionnaires. Differences in postoperative maximum pads per day (MxPPD) and questionnaire scores were compared across preoperative factors, with P¡Ü0.05 indicating statistical significance.

Results

Telephone survey was completed by 101 of 238 patients (42%). Median age was 69 [63–75] years, BMI was 29 [26–32] kg/m². MxPPD was 5 [3–9] preoperatively and 2 [1–3] postoperatively (r=0.255, P=0.011). Postoperative median EPIC-UD was 82 [67–89] and UDI-6 was 22 [11–36]. Postoperative MxPPD was lower in patients who reported being able to store urine before AUS {2 [1–2] vs. 2 [1–4], P=0.046}, and lower with urodynamically-proven detrusor overactivity (DO) {1.5 [1–2] with vs. 2 [1–4] without, P=0.050}. Detrusor pressure at maximum flow was negatively associated with QoL as measured by EPIC-UD score (r=−0.346, P=0.013) and UDI-6 score (r=0.413, P=0.003). Although 41 (41%) patients had a history of radiation, postoperative outcomes did not significantly differ with or without a history of radiation.

Conclusions

Few preoperative factors predict QoL after AUS insertion.

Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter in radiated and non - radiated compromised urethra. Assessment with a minimum 2 year follow-up

Purpose

to assess the efficacy of transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation on continence for male stress urinary incontinence in cases of prior surgical treatment or/and radiation failure, and as a first option in radiation patients.

Materials and Methods

From March 2007 to August 2012, 37 male patients were treated with transcorporal AUS AMS™ 800. Twelve patients had primary placement of transcorporal cuff, a surgical option due to a previous history of radiation and 25 patients had secondary procedure after failure of AUS or urinary incontinence surgery. Functional urinary outcomes were assessed by daily pad use, 24-hour Pad-test and ICIQ-SF questionnaire. Quality of life and satisfaction were assessed based on I-QoL and PGI-I questionnaires.

Results

After a median of 32 months, the continence rate (0 to 1 pad) was 69.7%. Median pad test was 17.5g (0-159), mean ICIQ-SF score was 7.3/21 (±5.4) and mean I-QoL score was 93.9/110. A total of 88% of the patients reported satisfaction with the AUS. The 5-year actuarial revision-free for AUS total device was 51%. Patients for primary implant for radiation were not more likely to experience revision than non-radiation patients. Preservation of erections was reported in half of the potent patients.

Conclusions

Transcorporal AUS cuff placement is a useful alternative procedure option for severe male UI treatment, especially in patients with a compromised urethra after prior surgery or radiation. A high continence rate was reported and implantation as first option in radiation patients should be considered.

The impact of incontinence etiology on artificial urinary sphincter outcomes

Purpose

To evaluate the impact of incontinence etiology on artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) device outcomes.

Materials and Methods

We identified 925 patients who underwent primary AUS placement from 1983 to 2011. The etiology of incontinence was categorized as radical prostatectomy alone, radical prostatectomy with radiation, benign prostate resection, and those with cryotherapy as a salvage prostate cancer treatment. Hazard regression and competing risk analyses were used to determine the association of the etiology of incontinence with device outcomes.

Results

The distribution of the 4 etiologies of incontinence included: 598 patients (64.6%) treated with prostatectomy alone, 206 (22.2%) with prostatectomy and pelvic radiation therapy, 104 (11.2%) with benign prostate resection, and 17 (1.8%) with prior cryotherapy. With a median follow-up of 4.9 years (interquartile range, 1.2–8.8 years), there was significant difference in the cumulative incidence of device infection/urethral erosion events between the four etiologies (p=0.003). On multivariable analysis, prior cryotherapy (reference prostatectomy alone; hazard ratio [HR], 3.44; p=0.01), older age (HR, 1.07; p=0.0009) and history of a transient ischemic attack (HR, 2.57; p=0.04) were associated with an increased risk of device infection or erosion. Notably, pelvic radiation therapy with prostatectomy was not associated with an increased risk of device infection or erosion (reference prostatectomy alone, p=0.30).

Conclusions

Compared to prostatectomy alone, prior treatment with salvage cryotherapy for recurrent prostate cancer was associated with an increased risk of AUS infection/erosion, whereas radiation (in addition to prostatectomy) was not.

Radiotherapy is associated with reduced continence outcomes following implantation of the artificial urinary sphincter in men with post-radical prostatectomy incontinence

Objectives:

The objective of this study is to present the outcomes of men undergoing implantation of artificial urinary sphincter, after treatment for prostate cancer and also to determine the effect of radiotherapy on continence outcomes after artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation.

Materials and Methods:

A prospectively acquired database of all 184 patients having AUS insertion between 2002 and 2012 was reviewed, and demographic data, mode of prostate cancer treatment(s) before implantation, and outcome in terms of complete continence (pad free, leak free) were assessed. Statistical analysis was performed by Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests.

Results:

A total of 58 (32%) men had bulbar AUS for urodynamically proven stress urinary incontinence consequent to treatment for prostate cancer in this period. Median follow-up post-AUS activation was 19 months (1–119). Forty-eight (83%) men had primary AUS insertion. Twenty-one (36%) men had radiotherapy as part of or as their sole treatment. Success rates were significantly higher in nonirradiated men having primary sphincter (89%) than in irradiated men (56%). Success rates were worse for men having revision AUS (40%), especially in irradiated men (33%).

Conclusion:

Radiotherapy as a treatment for prostate cancer was associated with significantly lower complete continence rates following AUS implantation.

[Urinary incontinence in men]

Stress urinary incontinence in men is predominantly iatrogenic whereby radical prostatectomy is the most common cause with persistent stress urinary incontinence rates varying between 10 % and 25 %. The first line therapy for postoperative male stress urinary incontinence is physiotherapy, especially pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation. If conservative treatment fails to show sufficient improvement, surgical therapy is recommended. Several treatment options are currently available for the surgical treatment of male stress urinary incontinence including artificial sphincters, adjustable and functional sling systems, bulking agents and implantable balloon systems.

Artificial urinary sphincter erosion after radical prostatectomy in patients treated with and without radiation

INTRODUCTION

There has been increasing evidence supporting the use of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer. Significant stress incontinence after RP is not uncommon and the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard of treatment. Our objective was to assess if increased use of radiotherapy after RP has changed the rate of erosion and infection in the face of improvement in radiation technique and equipment in men who had an AUS implanted in the last 10 years.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined 118 patients from December 2001 to January 2012 who underwent a RP with or without postoperative radiotherapy and subsequently had an AUS implanted. We divided the patients into two cohorts (Group 1: December 2001-December 2006 and Group 2: January 2007-January 2012). We reviewed all patient records for age, cuff size implanted, history of postoperative radiotherapy, previous incontinence surgery, revisions, and complications (erosion/infection).

RESULTS

There were 36 and 82 patients in Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The mean age was similar between groups, 67 years both groups (p = 0.980). The number of patients treated with postoperative radiotherapy was similar between groups (36% vs. 32%, p = 0.640, respectively). There was no difference in the incidence of erosion or infection between Group 1 and 2 (p = 0.848 and p = 0.178, respectively). The overall relative risk (RR) of erosion was significantly higher in those who had radiotherapy compared to those who did not (RR 4.05, 95% confidence interval 1.1-15.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Over the last 10 years, there has not been an increase in the number of patients receiving an AUS after RP and radiotherapy at our centre. During this time, the incidence of erosion and infection has not increased. However, our study reaffirms that the relative risk of erosion remains higher in patients who have had radiotherapy despite improvement in radiation treatment techniques and equipment.

[Diagnosis and surgical treatment of postprostatectomy stress incontinence: recommendation of the working group Urologische Funktionsdiagnostik und Urologie der Frau]

Today, for the surgical treatment of postprostatectomy incontinence, several treatment options are available, e.g., adjustable and functional sling systems, artificial sphincter, bulking agents, and balloons. However, no recommendations in terms of specific diagnostic tools and differentiated treatment options for everyday life are available. Our aim is to provide some clinically relevant recommendations for the necessary diagnostic workup and different treatment options of postprostatetectomy incontinence to support clinical decisions in everyday life. Treatment selection should be based on contraindications. However, there is a broad overlap of the various surgical options.

[Urogynecology II: urinary incontinence in men and women: surgical treatment of urinary incontinence and prolapse]

Numerous surgical procedures are available for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women and men. On a par with classical therapy options (e.g. colposuspension and artificial sphincter prosthesis) suburethral tape procedures have become established as the minimally invasive standard of care. Regarding comorbidities and recurrent urinary incontinence, therapeutic procedures should be modified on an individual basis. It is crucial to involve patients in therapeutic decision-making and counseling should be given with respect to all conservative and operative alternatives.

Stemming the tide of mild to moderate post-prostatectomy incontinence: A retrospective comparison of transobturator male slings and the artificial urinary sphincter

INTRODUCTION

The AUS remains the gold standard treatment for post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI), although most patients with mild-moderate PPI prefer a sling without strong evidence of procedural equivalence. This study compares outcomes of 2 procedures for the treatment of mild-moderate PPI.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 124 patients (76 transobturator sling, 48 AUS) with mild-moderate PPI requiring intervention over an 8-year period. The primary outcome was continence. Secondary outcomes included global patient satisfaction, improvement, and complication rates. Mild to moderate incontinence was defined as requiring ≤5 pads/day.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in age (66.2 vs. 68.1 years; p = 0.17) or prostate cancer characteristics for slings and AUS, respectively. AUS patients had higher Charlson comorbidity scores and were more likely to have previous radiotherapy. Median length of follow up was 24 months for slings and 42 months for AUS. There was no difference in continence rates, 88.2% vs. 87.5% (p = 0.79), rate of improvement, 94.7% vs. 95.8% (p = 1.00), or patient satisfaction, 93.4% vs. 91.7% (p = 0.73), for slings and AUS, respectively. Complication rates were equivalent (19.7% vs. 16.7%; p = 1.00), though a significantly higher proportion of complications with AUS were Clavien Grade 3 (0% vs. 75%; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

For mild to moderate PPI there is no difference in continence, satisfaction, or improvement rates, between AUS and slings. AUS complications tend to be more severe. Our study supports the use of slings as first-line treatment for mild-moderate PPI.

Artificial urinary sphincter placement in compromised urethras and survival: a comparison of virgin, radiated and reoperative cases

PURPOSE

Although long-term outcomes after initial placement of artificial urinary sphincters are established, limited data exist comparing sphincter survival in patients with compromised urethras (prior radiation, artificial urinary sphincter placement or urethroplasty). We evaluated artificial urinary sphincter failure in patients with compromised and noncompromised urethras.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 86 sphincters placed at a single institution between December 1997 and September 2012. We assessed patient demographic, comorbid disease and surgical characteristics. All nonfunctioning, eroded or infected devices were considered failures.

RESULTS

Of the 86 patients reviewed 67 (78%) had compromised urethras and had higher failure rates than the noncompromised group (34% vs 21%, p=0.02). Compared to the noncompromised group, cases of prior radiation therapy (HR 4.78; 95% CI 1.27, 18.04), urethroplasty (HR 8.61; 95% CI 1.27, 58.51) and previous artificial urinary sphincter placement (HR 8.14; 95% CI 1.71, 38.82) had a significantly increased risk of failure. The risk of artificial urinary sphincter failure increased with more prior procedures. An increased risk of failure was observed after 3.5 cm cuff placement (HR 8.62; 95% CI 2.82, 26.36) but not transcorporal placement (HR 1.21; 95% CI 0.49, 2.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Artificial urinary sphincter placement in patients with compromised urethras from prior artificial urinary sphincter placement, radiation or urethroplasty had a statistically significant higher risk of failure than placement in patients with noncompromised urethras. Urethral mobilization and transection performed during posterior urethroplasty surgeries likely compromise urethral blood supply, predisposing patients to failure. Patients with severely compromised urethras from multiple prior procedures may have improved outcomes with transcorporal cuff placement rather than a 3.5 cm cuff.

[Modern operative treatment possibilities in male stress urinary incontinence]

Postprostatectomy incontinence (PPI) is one of the most feared complications of radical prostatectomy with major impact on quality of life and social well-being. In recent years due to improved surgical techniques a reduction of the postoperative incontinence rate was achieved. However, due to the increasing number of radical prostatectomies performed for prostate cancer, a substantial and increasing number of patients are suffering from postoperative stress urinary incontinence. If conservative treatment fails, surgical therapy is recommended. For decades, the artificial urinary sphincter was the reference standard for moderate to severe postoperative male stress urinary incontinence. However, patients' demand on minimally invasive treatment options is high. Age or advanced prostate cancer should not be an exclusion criterion for surgical treatment of persistent PPI.

The current role of the artificial urinary sphincter in male and female urinary incontinence

The evolution of the artificial urinary sphincter has affected the current surgical options for urinary incontinence. With its unique features, the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has been an attractive option for the treatment of urinary incontinence regardless of gender. The current paper discusses the indications, contraindications, types of devices, surgical approaches, outcomes, and complications of the AUS in the treatment of both male and female urinary incontinence. A PubMed review of the available literature was performed and articles reporting implantation of artificial urinary sphincters for urinary incontinence in both male and female patients were evaluated. There was a comparable satisfactory continence rate after the implantation of an AUS (59~97% in males vs. 60~92% in females). In comparison, there were some differences in the indications, contraindications, surgical approaches, outcomes, and complications of the AUS implanted for urinary incontinence in male and female patients. AUS implantation is a safe and effective surgical option for the treatment of urinary incontinence of various etiologies. Continuous evolution of the device has made it an attractive option for the treatment of both male and female urinary incontinence.

Current trends in the management of post-prostatectomy incontinence

One of the annoying complications of radical prostatectomy is urinary incontinence. Post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) causes a significant impact on the patient's health-related quality of life. Although PPI is stress urinary incontinence caused by intrinsic sphincter deficiency in most cases, bladder dysfunction and vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis can induce urine leakage also. Exact clinical assessments, such as a voiding diary, incontinence questionnaire, pad test, urodynamic study, and urethrocystoscopy, are necessary to determine adequate treatment. The initial management of PPI is conservative treatment including lifestyle interventions, pelvic floor muscle training with or without biofeedback, and bladder training. An early start of conservative treatment is recommended during the first year. If the conservative treatment fails, surgical treatment is recommended. Surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy can be divided into minimally invasive and invasive treatments. Minimally invasive treatment includes injection of urethral bulking agents, male suburethral sling, and adjustable continence balloons. Invasive treatment includes artificial urinary sphincter implantation, which is still the gold standard and the most effective treatment of PPI. However, the demand for minimally invasive treatment is increasing, and many urologists consider male suburethral slings to be an acceptable treatment for PPI. The male sling is usually recommended for patients with persistent mild or moderate incontinence. It is necessary to improve our understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of PPI and to compare different procedures for the development of new and potentially better treatment options.

Indications for revision of artificial urinary sphincter and modifiable risk factors for device-related morbidity

AIMS

The aim of the study is to evaluate the causes for artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) failure in a contemporary series, and to detect modifiable risk factors for device-related complications. The aim is to also report outcome after AUS revision.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent AUS revision at a tertiary care institution by a single surgeon from 2006 to 2011. There were 53 AUS revisions performed on 34 patients at a median age of 69 years.

RESULTS

Urethral atrophy was the most common indication for revision. Fourteen patients (41%) underwent more than one revision. Seven patients had urethral catheterization in the setting of an active AUS while admitted to a non-urologic service; these patients all developed cuff erosion. Fifty-four percent of urethral erosions were associated with such traumatic catheterizations. After revision, 80% of patients with an AUS in place were using one or no pad daily at mean follow up of 27 months.

CONCLUSION

Urethral atrophy remains the most common reason for AUS revision. More than half of all urethral erosions are secondary to urethral catheterization in the setting of an active sphincter, suggesting that some of the risk of device-related morbidity may be modifiable.

Artificial urinary sphincter: long-term results and patient satisfaction

The published evidence concerning the safety, efficacy, and patient satisfaction for implantation of the current model of the artificial urinary sphincter (AS 800) in men with post prostatectomy urinary incontinence was the objective of this review. A Pub Med English language literature search from 1995 to 2011 was performed. A majority of men who undergo AUS implantation for post prostatectomy urinary incontinence achieve satisfactory results (0 to 1 pad per day). Infection rates range from 0.46 to 7%, cuff erosion rates range from 3.8 to 10%, and urethral atrophy ranges from 9.6 to 11.4%. Kaplan-Meier 5 year projections for freedom from any reoperation were 50% for a small series and 79.4% for a larger series. Kaplan-Meier projections for freedom from mechanical failure were 79% at 5 years and 72% at 10 years. In another series 10 year projections for freedom from mechanical failure were 64%. Although the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard for the treatment of this disorder, most men will continue to need at least one pad per day for protection, and they are subject to a significant chance of future AUS revision or replacement.

Treatment options for male stress urinary incontinence

The diagnosis and management of male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is complex. Various etiologies exist, with radical prostatectomy being the most common cause in men seeking treatment. SUI in this setting is often temporary and resolves within the first postoperative year. Therefore, it is important to understand the natural history of male SUI before initiating treatment. Generally, the initial management of SUI that persists after 12 months consists of conservative measures, such as pelvic floor muscle exercises. Several treatments are available for men whose continence does not improve after pelvic floor muscle exercises. In order of increasing complexity they are urethral bulking agents, male slings, and the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). With over 30 years of published data suggesting excellent long-term outcomes, the AUS is considered the gold standard treatment of male SUI. Male slings have recently demonstrated efficacy for selected patients and are likely to be used more often in the future as experience with these devices grows.

Urodynamic effects of a percutaneously controlled static hydraulic urethral sphincter in canine cadavers

OBJECTIVE

To describe a percutaneously controlled static hydraulic urethral sphincter (SHUS) and evaluate urodynamic effects of the SHUS in canine cadavers.

SAMPLE POPULATION

Cadavers of 6 adult female dogs.

PROCEDURE

Cadavers were obtained immediately after dogs were euthanatized. Baseline maximal urethral closure pressure (MUCP) and cystourethral leak point pressure (CLPP) were measured by use of a urethral pressure profilometer. An SHUS system was constructed by use of a silicone vascular occluder and subcutaneous infusion port. The SHUS system was then placed around the pelvic urethra in each cadaver. Measurements of MUCP and CLPP were repeated after varying occlusion of the SHUS (0%, 25%, and 50% occlusion). Baseline MUCP and CLPP values were compared with values obtained at 0%, 25%, and 50% occlusion of the SHUS by use of repeated-measures ANOVA.

RESULTS

Mean +/- SD MUCP for canine cadavers was 7 +/- 1.3 cm H2O at baseline, which increased to 127 +/- 53 cm H2O after 50% occlusion of the SHUS. Mean CLPP was 11 +/- 8.6 cm H2O at baseline, which increased to 73 +/- 38 cm H2O after 50% occlusion of the SHUS. Mean MUCP and CLPP were significantly associated with the amount of occlusion.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The SHUS had positive effects on MUCP and CLPP in canine cadavers. Therefore, additional evaluation of the SHUS in live dogs is warranted.

Externally Readjustable Sling for Treatment of Male Stress Urinary Incontinence: Points of Technique and Preliminary Results

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Slings have been successful in the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence (SUI). However, in many situations, the sling may have either an excess of or inadequate tension, producing voiding difficulties or urinary leakage, respectively. The effectiveness of a readjustable sling for the treatment of male SUI has been evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between October 2001 and November 2002, six consecutive male patients with SUI, aged 69 to 81 years, received a readjustable sling (Remeex) at the Monforte Comarcal Hospital.

RESULTS

Five patients (83%) achieved continence, while the remaining patient showed important improvement. All patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the results. The average follow-up time was 18 months (range 12-50 months). There were no postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This original treatment allows readjustment of the sling tension in the immediate or mid-term postoperative period. Initial clinical results are encouraging.