OBJECTIVES: To review our experience regarding the overall efficacy and safety of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in men with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after cystoprostatectomy with an orthotopic ileal neobladder. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 5 men who underwent placement of an AUS (AMS 800) for severe SUI after radical cystectomy with an orthotopic ileal neobladder. Incontinence symptoms and quality of life were quantified using two validated continence questionnaires (Urogenital Distress Inventory Short Form and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire Short Form) and a brief addendum questionnaire. The degree of continence, perioperative and postoperative complications and infections, symptom distress, quality of life, and patient satisfaction were compared before and after AUS placement. RESULTS: Complete (0 pads per day) or social (1 pad or less per day) continence was reported in 5 of 5 patients after AUS placement. The average pad usage significantly decreased from 6.2 to 0.6 per day (P <0.001). No significant perioperative or postoperative complications or infections were noted. Symptom distress, quality of life, and patient satisfaction were significantly improved after AUS placement (P < 0.01, < 0.0001, and < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: With short-term follow-up and a limited number of patients, the placement of an AUS for treatment of SUI after bladder substitution is well tolerated and reliable and has a positive impact on patients' quality of life.
OBJECTIVES: To review our experience regarding the overall efficacy and safety of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in men with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after cystoprostatectomy with an orthotopic ileal neobladder. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 5 men who underwent placement of an AUS (AMS 800) for severe SUI after radical cystectomy with an orthotopic ileal neobladder. Incontinence symptoms and quality of life were quantified using two validated continence questionnaires (Urogenital Distress Inventory Short Form and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire Short Form) and a brief addendum questionnaire. The degree of continence, perioperative and postoperative complications and infections, symptom distress, quality of life, and patient satisfaction were compared before and after AUS placement. RESULTS: Complete (0 pads per day) or social (1 pad or less per day) continence was reported in 5 of 5 patients after AUS placement. The average pad usage significantly decreased from 6.2 to 0.6 per day (P <0.001). No significant perioperative or postoperative complications or infections were noted. Symptom distress, quality of life, and patient satisfaction were significantly improved after AUS placement (P < 0.01, < 0.0001, and < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: With short-term follow-up and a limited number of patients, the placement of an AUS for treatment of SUI after bladder substitution is well tolerated and reliable and has a positive impact on patients' quality of life.