Literature DB >> 25210552

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

Nathan Y Hoy1, Keith F Rourke1.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Year:  2014        PMID: 25210552      PMCID: PMC4137013          DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.2108

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J        ISSN: 1911-6470            Impact factor:   1.862


  28 in total

1.  Quality of life and continence assessment of the artificial urinary sphincter in men with minimum 3.5 years of followup.

Authors:  F Haab; B A Trockman; P E Zimmern; G E Leach
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Artificial urinary sphincter placement in elderly men.

Authors:  R Corey O'Connor; Dana K Nanigian; Bhavin N Patel; Michael L Guralnick; Lars M Ellision; Anthony R Stone
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: incidence by definition, risk factors and temporal trend in a large series with a long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Emilio Sacco; Tommaso Prayer-Galetti; Francesco Pinto; Simonetta Fracalanza; Giovanni Betto; Francesco Pagano; Walter Artibani
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.588

4.  Mid-term results for the retroluminar transobturator sling suspension for stress urinary incontinence after prostatectomy.

Authors:  Ricarda M Bauer; Irina Soljanik; Claudius Füllhase; Alexander Karl; Armin Becker; Christian G Stief; Christian Gozzi
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2010-09-30       Impact factor: 5.588

5.  Artificial urinary sphincter for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: long-term subjective results.

Authors:  A E Gousse; S Madjar; M M Lambert; I J Fishman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 6.  Artificial urinary sphincter for post-prostatectomy incontinence: a review.

Authors:  Mary H James; Kurt A McCammon
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2014-02-16       Impact factor: 3.369

7.  The impact of an antibiotic coating on the artificial urinary sphincter infection rate.

Authors:  Mitra R de Cógáin; Daniel S Elliott
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Efficacy of artificial urinary sphincter implantation after failed bone-anchored male sling for postprostatectomy incontinence.

Authors:  Mark B Fisher; Neelesh Aggarwal; Hakan Vuruskan; Ajay K Singla
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Artificial urinary sphincter versus male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence--what do patients choose?

Authors:  Angelish Kumar; Elana Rosenberg Litt; Katie N Ballert; Victor W Nitti
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-01-18       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  A prospective study evaluating the efficacy of the artificial sphincter AMS 800 for the treatment of postradical prostatectomy urinary incontinence and the correlation between preoperative urodynamic and surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Flavio Trigo Rocha; Cristiano Mendes Gomes; Anuar Ibrahim Mitre; Sami Arap; Miguel Srougi
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.649

View more
  2 in total

1.  SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF POST-PROSTATECTOMY INCONTINENCE.

Authors:  Arthi Satyanarayan; Ryan Mooney; Nirmish Singla
Journal:  Eur Med J Urol       Date:  2016-04

2.  Artificial Urinary Sphincter Is Better Than Slings for Moderate Male Stress Urinary Incontinence With Acceptable Complication Rate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Lede Lin; Wenjin Sun; Xiaotong Guo; Liang Zhou
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-02-09
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.