The artificial genitourinary sphincter

Transalbugineal Artificial Urinary Sphincter: A Refined Implantation Technique to Improve Surgical Outcomes

The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation is an effective treatment of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI). Still, it may result in troublesome complications such as intraoperative urethral lesion and postoperative erosion. Based on the multilayered structure of the tunica albuginea of the corpora cavernosa, we evaluated an alternative transalbugineal surgical technique of AUS cuff placement with the aim to decrease perioperative morbidity while preserving the integrity of the corpora cavernosa. A retrospective study was conducted in a tertiary referral center from September 2012 to October 2021, including 47 consecutive patients undergoing AUS (AMS800^®) transalbugineal implantation. At a median (IQR) follow-up of 60 (24-84) months, no intraoperative urethral injury and only one noniatrogenic erosion occurred. The actuarial 12 mo and 5 yr overall erosion-free rates were 95.74% (95% CI: 84.04-98.92) and 91.76% (95% CI: 75.23-97.43), respectively. In preoperatively potent patients, the IIEF-5 score remained unchanged. The social continence (0-1 pads per day) rate was 82.98% (CI 95%: 68.83-91.10) at 12 mos and 76.81% (CI 95%: 60.56-87.04) at 5 yrs follow-up. Our technically refined approach to AUS implantation may help to avoid intraoperative urethral lesions and lower the risk of subsequent erosion without compromising sexual function in potent patients. Prospective and adequately powered studies are necessary to achieve more compelling evidence.

Artificial urinary sphincter significantly better than fixed sling for moderate post-prostatectomy stress urinary incontinence: a propensity score-matched study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) vs retrourethral transobturator sling (RTS) in men with moderate post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) using propensity score-matching analysis to enhance the validity of the comparison (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive men with moderate (3-5 pads/day) stress-prevalent PPI were included if implanted with a RTS (TiLOOP^® Male; pfm medical, Köln, Germany) or AUS (AMS800^® ; Boston Scientific, Boston, MA, USA) since July 2011 to December 2017 and with ≥12 months of follow-up. Preoperative assessment included 24-h pad usage, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF), urethrocystoscopy, and urodynamics if indicated. Propensity score-matching analysis was based on age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, pad usage, previous radiotherapy, and urethrotomy. The primary outcome was at least 'much improved' response at 12-months according to the Patient Global Impression of Improvement questionnaire, without additional PPI surgery or prosthesis explantation.

RESULTS

Of 109 included patients, 70 patients were matched and the study groups were well balanced for the baseline matched variables. The median baseline 24-h pad usage was four in both groups (P = 0.10), and median follow-up was 51.2 months for AUS and 47.2 months (P = 0.5) for RTS patients. In the AUS and RTS cohorts, respectively, 33 (94.3%) and 24 (68.6%) patients achieved the primary outcome (P < 0.001), the 0-1 pad/day rates was 94.3% vs 68.6% (P = 0.012) at 12 months, and 91.4% vs 68.6% (P = 0.034) at last follow-up. At the last follow-up, the median 24-h leakage volumes, median ICIQ-SF scores and satisfaction rates were 0 vs 15 mL (P = 0.017), 4 vs 10 (P = 0.001), and 94.3% vs 68.6% (P = 0.012) in the AUS and RTS cohorts, respectively. There were no significant differences in overall rates of complications and re-interventions, although Clavien-Dindo Grade III complications (n = 3) occurred only in the AUS group. At sensitivity analysis, the study was reasonably robust to hidden bias.

CONCLUSION

We found that AUS implantation significantly outperformed RTS in patients with moderate PPI for both subjective and objective outcomes.

Newer and novel artificial urinary sphincters (AUS): the development of alternatives to the current AUS device

INTRODUCTION

The current artificial urinary sphincter (AUS), AMS 800 (American Medical Systems, Minnesota, MN, USA) is considered the standard of care for the treatment of urinary incontinence (UI). While the long-term effectiveness, safety, and durability of the current model of the AMS 800 are well documented, it is not without its limitations and complications. Over the last few years, improvements in design and innovative research into AUS devices have increased the treatment arsenal in male UI.

METHODS

Articles from peer-reviewed journals, abstracts from scientific meetings and electronic literature searches formed the basis of this review.

RESULTS

Newer AUS models, e.g. FlowSecure, Zephyr, Pro-ACT and other novel experimental AUS devices, are designed to simulate a healthy human sphincter and address the limitation of the existing AMS 800 device.

CONCLUSIONS

Newer and novel AUS models are innovative and showed promising outcomes in short- to intermediate-term follow-up. However, there exists the need for prospective randomised clinical trials and complete reporting of adverse and long-term results before these AUS models can replace the existing AMS 800 device.

[Salvage therapy with artificial urinary sphincter after Advance™ male sling failure for post-prostatectomy incontinence: a first clinical experience]

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical outcome following artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation after failure of Advance™ sub-urethral male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI).

METHODS

A prospective evaluation was conducted about consecutive patients who received an AUS after failure of Advance™ therapy in one tertiary reference center. Evaluation included medical history, pad use and operative data (duration, cuff size, technical difficulties). Follow-up was scheduled at 1, 6, 12 months and yearly thereafter. Clinical outcome was evaluated by pad use, patient global impression of improvement (PGI-I) scale and assessment of side effects. Cure was defined as no pad usage.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were included in this evaluation. Median follow-up was 20 months (12-43). No patient was lost to follow-up. Four patients had a history of radiation therapy and all patients had mild or moderate PPI with previous failed Advance™ surgery. Median (range) operative time was 47 minutes (40-60). No technical problem occurred during AUS implantation. Hospital stay duration and catheterization duration were respectively 2 days and 24 hours in all but one case. At last follow-up, 10/12 patients (83%) were cured and fully satisfied. Two were improved, wearing only one pad per day. Postoperative complications were noted in two cases (17%) (one case of cutaneous erosion and one case of superficial iliac wound infection).

CONCLUSIONS

AUS implantation is feasible in patients who have undergone Advance™ male sling implantation. Mid-term results of this procedure are comparable to those obtained after first line AUS implantation.

Outcomes following artificial sphincter implantation after prior unsuccessful male sling

PURPOSE

Despite the proven success and durability of the artificial urinary sphincter many patients elect an AdVance® sling as the initial treatment of male stress incontinence. We determined whether sling placement would change the outcome of an ensuing artificial urinary sphincter.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 29 patients with stress urinary incontinence after failed sling placement were treated with an AMS 800® artificial urinary sphincter between January 2006 and May 2011. A control group of 136 men with a primary artificial urinary sphincter was used for comparison. Preoperative and postoperative evaluation included demographic variables, voiding diary, 24-hour pad weight, urodynamic characteristics, operative time, estimated blood loss, complication rate, followup and cuff selection.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference in urodynamic characteristics, operative variables or the complication rate. Pad use was reported as less than 1 pad daily in 96% of patients (28 of 29) with a secondary artificial urinary sphincter at 3-month followup. At 20.7 months 6.9% of patients (2 of 29) treated with an artificial urinary sphincter after the male sling required revision of the artificial urinary sphincter. The overall complication rate in the control group was 8.8% (12 of 136 patients) with a 2.2% infection rate (3 of 136). The overall complication rate in the artificial urinary sphincter plus male sling group was 6.9% (2 of 29 patients) with a 0% infection rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who require an artificial urinary sphincter after an initial male sling seem to fare as well as those who undergo primary artificial urinary sphincter implantation.

Neurogenic bladder

Congenital anomalies such as meningomyelocele and diseases/damage of the central, peripheral, or autonomic nervous systems may produce neurogenic bladder dysfunction, which untreated can result in progressive renal damage, adverse physical effects including decubiti and urinary tract infections, and psychological and social sequelae related to urinary incontinence. A comprehensive bladder-retraining program that incorporates appropriate education, training, medication, and surgical interventions can mitigate the adverse consequences of neurogenic bladder dysfunction and improve both quantity and quality of life. The goals of bladder retraining for neurogenic bladder dysfunction are prevention of urinary incontinence, urinary tract infections, detrusor overdistension, and progressive upper urinary tract damage due to chronic, excessive detrusor pressures. Understanding the physiology and pathophysiology of micturition is essential to select appropriate pharmacologic and surgical interventions to achieve these goals. Future perspectives on potential pharmacological, surgical, and regenerative medicine options for treating neurogenic bladder dysfunction are also presented.

Laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter implantation for female genuine stress urinary incontinence: technique and 4-year experience in 25 patients

OBJECTIVE

to assess the safety, feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic implantation of the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in women with genuine stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

from April 2005 to July 2009, 25 women (mean age 66.8 years) with genuine SUI had a laparoscopic implantation of the AUS (AMS 800(TM) , American Medical Systems, Minnetonka, MN, USA). Patients had a negative Marshall test and urodynamic studies showed decreased closure pressure. All patients had a history of urogynaecological surgery. Transperitoneal laparoscopic access was created with two midline 10-mm and two lateral 5-mm trocars. One of the lateral port incisions was later extended to facilitate urethrovaginal dissection with scissors and dissector, and the insertion and assembly of the AUS. In six cases of concomitant genito-urinary prolapse, laparoscopic anterior and posterior mesh promontofixation was also performed.

RESULTS

the AUS was successfully implanted in all cases with no conversion to open surgery. There were no intra- or perioperative complications, except one vaginal perforation which was repaired during surgery. The mean operative duration was 92 min (71 min without and 123 min with simultaneous promontofixation). Five patients developed urinary retention, which was managed with re-insertion of the urethral catheter for 2 days in four and with insertion of a suprapubic catheter for 4 weeks in a patient with spina bifida. During the mean follow-up of 26.1 months, two treatment failures were diagnosed due to vaginal erosion and were managed with removal of the AUS. All the remaining 23 patients reported continence, either complete (in 19) or social (in four). However, this was not a randomized comparative study.

CONCLUSION

laparoscopic implantation of the AUS in women with genuine SUI is safe, feasible and efficient.

Can advance transobturator sling suspension cure male urinary postoperative stress incontinence?

PURPOSE

In a prospective 2-center study we confirmed and extended published results of the positive effect on post-prostatectomy stress incontinence of transobturator sling suspension using an Advance male sling.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From September 2007 to June 2008 a male sling was placed and evaluated in 36 men according to the Rehder and Gozzi method. Diagnosis was based on 24-hour urine loss measured by a pad test, a 24-hour micturition frequency volume chart and cystoscopy. A visual analog scale for continence and bother, and a pad test were used preoperatively and postoperatively to objectively evaluate operative results.

RESULTS

At 1-year followup cure was achieved in 9.0% of patients and improvement was achieved in 45.5%. No effect on incontinence was seen in 36.5% of patients and 9.0% experienced worsening incontinence by pad test. The mean +/- SD visual analogue scale score of 6.1 +/- 2.2 (range 0 to 10) preoperatively improved significantly to 4.6 +/- 3.0 at 3 months (p = 0.024) and not significantly to 4.9 +/- 3.1 by 1 year postoperatively (p = 0.39). Improved incontinence did not correlate with patient age or incontinence severity. Complications developed in 2 patients, including sling infection and postoperative urinary retention in 1 each.

CONCLUSIONS

The transobturator sling suspension operation is a minimally invasive, safe procedure for male postoperative stress incontinence. Significantly improved continence was not observed on pad test but significant improvement in continence and bother was seen on the visual analog scale at 3 months.