Tag Archive for: artificial urinary sphincter

Posts

Video: Complications following AUS placement after RP and radiotherapy

Complications following artificial urinary sphincter placement after radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy: a meta-analysis

Anthony S. Bates1,*, Richard M. Martin2 and Tim R. Terry1

1Department of Urology, Leicester General Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK 2School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

Objective

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement after radical prostatectomy (RP) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT).

Patients and Methods

There were 1 886 patients available for analysis of surgical revision outcomes and 949 for persistent urinary incontinence (UI) outcomes from 15 and 11 studies, respectively. The mean age (sd) was 66.9 (1.4) years and the number of patients per study was 126.6 (41.7). The mean (sd, range) follow-up was 36.7 (3.9, 18–68) months. A systematic database search was conducted using keywords, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Published series of AUS implantations were retrieved, according to the inclusion criteria. The Newcastle–Ottawa Score was used to ascertain the quality of evidence for each study. Surgical results from each case series were extracted. Data were analysed using CMA® statistical software.

Results

AUS revision was higher in RP + EBRT vs RP alone, with a random effects risk ratio of 1.56 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.72; P < 0.050; I2 = 82.0%) and a risk difference of 16.0% (95% CI 2.05–36.01; P < 0.080). Infection/erosion contributed to the majority of surgical revision risk compared with urethral atrophy (P = 0.020). Persistent UI after implantation was greater in patients treated with EBRT (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Men receiving RP + EBRT appear at increased risk of infection/erosion and urethral atrophy, resulting in a greater risk of surgical revision compared with RP alone. Persistent UI is more common with RP + EBRT.

 

AUS outcomes in irradiated vs non-irradiated patients

Outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter implantation in the irradiated patient

Niranjan J. Sathianathen, Sean M. McGuigan* and Daniel A. Moon*

Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, and *Epworth HealthCare, Melbourne, Vic., Australia

Read the full article
OBJECTIVES

• To present the outcomes of men undergoing artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation.

• To determine the impact a history of radiation therapy has on the outcomes of prosthetic surgery for stress urinary incontinence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• A cohort of 77 consecutive men undergoing AUS implantation for stress urinary incontinence after prostate cancer surgery, including 29 who had also been irradiated, were included in a prospective database and followed up for a mean period of 21.2 months.

• Continence rates and incidence of complications, revision and cuff erosion were evaluated, with results in irradiated men compared with those of men who had undergone radical prostatectomy alone.

• The effect of co-existing hypertension, diabetes mellitus and surgical approach on outcomes were also examined.

RESULTS

• Overall, the rate of social continence (0–1 pad/day) was 87% and similar in irradiated and non-irradiated men (86.2 vs 87.5%). Likewise, the incidence of infection (3.4 vs 0%), erosion (3.4 vs 2.0%) and revision surgery (10.3 vs 12.5%) were not significantly different between the groups.

• There was a far greater incidence of co-existing urethral stricture disease in irradiated patients (62.1 vs 10.4%) which often complicated management; however, AUS implantation was still feasible in these men and, in four such cases, a transcorporal cuff placement was used.

• There were poorer outcomes in patients with diabetes, and a greater re-operation rate in those men who underwent a transverse scrotal rather than perineal surgical approach, although the differences did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

• Previous irradiation in patients may increase the complexity of treatment because of a greater incidence of co-existing urethral stricture disease; however, these patients are still able to achieve a level of social continence similar to that of non-irradiated patients, with no discernable increase in complication rates, cuff erosion or the need for revision surgery.

• AUS implantation remains the ‘gold standard’ for management of moderate-to-severe stress urinary incontinence in both irradiated and non-irradiated patients after prostate cancer treatment.

 

 

Step-by-Step: Robot-assisted AUS insertion

 

 

 

 

Robot-assisted laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter insertion in men with neurogenic stress urinary incontinence

David R. Yates, Véronique Phé, Morgan Rouprêt, Christophe Vaessen, Jérôme Parra, Pierre Mozer and Emmanuel Chartier-Kastler

Academic department of Urology, Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Faculté de Médecine Pierre et Marie Curie, University Paris 6, Paris, France

The first two authors contributed equally to this article.

Read the full article
OBJECTIVES

• To describe for the first time the technique of robot-assisted artificial urinary sphincter (R-AUS) insertion in male patients with neurogenic incontinence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

• From January 2011 to the present date, six patients with spinal cord injury have undergone R-AUS insertion at our academic institution and we have prospectively collected data on pre-, peri- and early postoperative outcomes.

• A transperitoneal five-port approach was used using a three-arm standard da Vinci® robot (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) in a 30° reverse Trendelenburg position.

• The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) cuff was placed circumferentially around the bladder neck, the reservoir was left intra-abdominally in a lateral vesicular space and the pump was placed in a classic scrotal position.

RESULTS

• All six patients had successful robotic implantation of the AUS.

• The median patient age was 51.5 years, the median (range) operating time was 195 (175–250) min with no significant blood loss or intra-operative complications. The median (range) length of hospital stay was 4 (4–6) days.

• At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 13 (6–21) months, all six patients had a functioning device with complete continence.

• To date, we have observed no incidence of early erosion, device infection or device malfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

• Allowing for the preliminary nature of our data, R-AUS insertion appears safe and technically feasible.

• Larger studies with long-term follow-up and comparison with open AUS insertion are necessary before definitive statements can be made for R-AUS in respect of complications and functional outcomes.

© 2022 BJU International. All Rights Reserved.