Literature DB >> 25014577

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

James B McGeady1, Jack W McAninch2, Mathew D Truesdale2, Sarah D Blaschko2, Stacey Kenfield2, Benjamin N Breyer3.   

Abstract

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.
Copyright © 2014 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  artificial; radiation; urinary incontinence; urinary sphincter

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25014577      PMCID: PMC4527678          DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.06.088

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  30 in total

1.  Long-term outcomes after primary failures of artificial urinary sphincter implantation.

Authors:  Rou Wang; Edward J McGuire; Chang He; Gary J Faerber; Jerilyn M Latini
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2012-02-04       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Complex artificial urinary sphincter revision and reimplantation cases--how do they fare compared to virgin cases?

Authors:  H Henry Lai; Timothy B Boone
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  [Male stress urinary incontinence: medium-term results of treatment by sub-urethral bone anchored sling InVance™].

Authors:  P Claudon; R Spie; M Bats; F Saint; J Petit
Journal:  Prog Urol       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 0.915

4.  Impact of 3.5 cm artificial urinary sphincter cuff on primary and revision surgery for male stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Steven J Hudak; Allen F Morey
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 5.  High-risk prostate cancer: from definition to contemporary management.

Authors:  Patrick J Bastian; Stephen A Boorjian; Alberto Bossi; Alberto Briganti; Axel Heidenreich; Stephen J Freedland; Francesco Montorsi; Mack Roach; Fritz Schröder; Hein van Poppel; Christian G Stief; Andrew J Stephenson; Michael J Zelefsky
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-02-24       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Treatment of postprostatectomy male urinary incontinence with the transobturator retroluminal repositioning sling suspension: 3-year follow-up.

Authors:  Peter Rehder; Francois Haab; Jean-Nicolas Cornu; Christian Gozzi; Ricarda M Bauer
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-02-25       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  [Long-term results of the treatment of urinary incontinence with bulbar implantation of artificial urinary sphincter in men: a single-center experience].

Authors:  M Bordenave; M Rouprêt; L Taksin; J Parra; F Cour; F Richard; M-O Bitker; E Chartier-Kastler
Journal:  Prog Urol       Date:  2010-08-08       Impact factor: 0.915

8.  Early results of a European multicentre experience with a new self-anchoring adjustable transobturator system for treatment of stress urinary incontinence in men.

Authors:  M Raschid Hoda; Günter Primus; Katja Fischereder; Burkhard Von Heyden; Nasreldin Mohammed; Norbert Schmid; Volker Moll; Amir Hamza; Johannes J Karsch; Clemens Brössner; Paolo Fornara; Wilhelm Bauer
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 5.588

9.  Intermediate outcomes after transcorporal placement of an artificial urinary sphincter.

Authors:  Dominic Lee; Helen Zafirakis; Andrew Shapiro; O Lenaine Westney
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 3.369

10.  Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter cuff placement is associated with a higher risk of postoperative urinary retention.

Authors:  Paul J Smith; Steven J Hudak; J Francis Scott; Lee C Zhao; Allen F Morey
Journal:  Can J Urol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.344

View more
  22 in total

1.  [Prospective analysis of postoperative outcomes and complications of artificial urinary sphincter (AMS 800) implantation after previous buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty].

Authors:  M Grabbert; R M Bauer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Incontinence: Artificial urinary sphincter more likely to fail in compromised urethras.

Authors:  Sarah Payton
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 14.432

3.  Robotic urethral reconstruction: redefining the paradigm of posterior urethroplasty.

Authors:  Timothy C Boswell; Kevin J Hebert; Matthew K Tollefson; Boyd R Viers
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-02

4.  Prospective analysis of artificial urinary sphincter AMS 800 implantation after buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty.

Authors:  Valentin Maurer; Phillip Marks; Roland Dahlem; Clemens Rosenbaum; Christian P Meyer; Silke Riechardt; Margit Fisch; Tim Ludwig
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-01-17       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Impact of previous urethroplasty on the outcome after artificial urinary sphincter implantation: a prospective evaluation.

Authors:  Khalid Sayedahmed; Roberto Olianas; Bjoern Kaftan; Mohamed Omar; Mohamed El Shazly; Maximilian Burger; Roman Mayr; Bernd Rosenhammer
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  Artificial Urinary Sphincter Complications: Risk Factors, Workup, and Clinical Approach.

Authors:  Roger K Khouri; Nicolas M Ortiz; Benjamin M Dropkin; Gregory A Joice; Adam S Baumgarten; Allen F Morey; Steven J Hudak
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 7.  A Systematic Approach to the Evaluation and Management of the Failed Artificial Urinary Sphincter.

Authors:  Amy D Dobberfuhl; Craig V Comiter
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 3.092

8.  Risk factors for subsequent urethral atrophy in patients undergoing artificial urinary sphincter placement.

Authors:  Matthew J Ziegelmann; Brian J Linder; Boyd R Viers; Laureano J Rangel; Marcelino E Rivera; Daniel S Elliott
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2018-11-26

9.  The impact of prior external beam radiation therapy on device outcomes following artificial urinary sphincter revision surgery.

Authors:  Madeleine Grace Manka; Brian J Linder; Laureano J Rangel; Daniel S Elliott
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-02

10.  Comparison of 3.5 cm and transcorporal cuffs in high-risk artificial urinary sphincter populations.

Authors:  Michael T Davenport; Abdulhadi M Akhtar; Nabeel A Shakir; Adam S Baumgarten; Yooni A Yi; Rachel L Bergeson; Ellen E Ward; Allen F Morey
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.