Khalid Sayedahmed1,2,3, Roberto Olianas4, Bjoern Kaftan4, Mohamed Omar5, Mohamed El Shazly5, Maximilian Burger6, Roman Mayr6, Bernd Rosenhammer6. 1. Department of Urology, Menoufia University, Shebeen El Kom, Egypt. Khalid_Sayedahmed@gmx.de. 2. Department of Urology, Rhein-Maas Hospital, Würselen, Germany. Khalid_Sayedahmed@gmx.de. 3. , Amsterdamer Straße 65, 52351, Düren, Germany. Khalid_Sayedahmed@gmx.de. 4. Department of Urology, Lueneburg Hospital, Lüneburg, Germany. 5. Department of Urology, Menoufia University, Shebeen El Kom, Egypt. 6. Department of Urology, Caritas St. Josef Medical Centre, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of previous urethroplasty on complication rates and postoperative continence after primary artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in male patients with severe stress urinary incontinence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective evaluation of patients undergoing primary AUS implantation was conducted. Patients with previous radiotherapy, AUS implantation or urethral stent placement were excluded. Main endpoints were postoperative continence and complication rates including necessity of AUS explantation. Kaplan-Meier analysis evaluated explantation-free survival. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify potential predictors for AUS explantation. RESULTS: 105 patients were included with a mean follow-up of 76.6 months (SD 15.9). 30 of these patients had a history of urethroplasty. Postoperatively, 96.2% of all patients were objectively continent (≤ 1 pad/day). No differences in postoperative continence and early complication rates were observed. Concerning long-term complications, infection, mechanical implant failure, and tissue atrophy were also comparable. Overall sphincter erosion rate was 12.3%, but significantly higher in urethroplasty patients (23.3% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.038) and sphincter explantation rate was threefold higher (p = 0.016) in the urethroplasty group. Furthermore, explantation-free survival was reduced compared to the non-urethroplasty group (p = 0.044). On logistic regression analysis, the previous urethroplasty was the only significant predictor for AUS explantation (p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: AUS implantation in patients with former urethroplasty can provide satisfying results. Compared to patients without the previous urethroplasty, the higher risk of cuff erosion and AUS explantation has to be addressed during preoperative consultation. Patients with the previous urethroplasty with grafting, long strictures and previous visual internal urethrotomy might be at highest risk.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of previous urethroplasty on complication rates and postoperative continence after primary artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in male patients with severe stress urinary incontinence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective evaluation of patients undergoing primary AUS implantation was conducted. Patients with previous radiotherapy, AUS implantation or urethral stent placement were excluded. Main endpoints were postoperative continence and complication rates including necessity of AUS explantation. Kaplan-Meier analysis evaluated explantation-free survival. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify potential predictors for AUS explantation. RESULTS: 105 patients were included with a mean follow-up of 76.6 months (SD 15.9). 30 of these patients had a history of urethroplasty. Postoperatively, 96.2% of all patients were objectively continent (≤ 1 pad/day). No differences in postoperative continence and early complication rates were observed. Concerning long-term complications, infection, mechanical implant failure, and tissue atrophy were also comparable. Overall sphincter erosion rate was 12.3%, but significantly higher in urethroplasty patients (23.3% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.038) and sphincter explantation rate was threefold higher (p = 0.016) in the urethroplasty group. Furthermore, explantation-free survival was reduced compared to the non-urethroplasty group (p = 0.044). On logistic regression analysis, the previous urethroplasty was the only significant predictor for AUS explantation (p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: AUS implantation in patients with former urethroplasty can provide satisfying results. Compared to patients without the previous urethroplasty, the higher risk of cuff erosion and AUS explantation has to be addressed during preoperative consultation. Patients with the previous urethroplasty with grafting, long strictures and previous visual internal urethrotomy might be at highest risk.
Authors: Stephen Mock; Roger R Dmochowski; Elizabeth T Brown; W Stuart Reynolds; Melissa R Kaufman; Douglas F Milam Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-06-30 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Philip H Kim; Laura C Pinheiro; Coral L Atoria; James A Eastham; Jaspreet S Sandhu; Elena B Elkin Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-09-24 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ane Ullate; Ignacio Arance; Miguel Virseda-Chamorro; Sonia Ruiz; Juliusz Szczesniewski; Carlos Téllez; Fabian Queissert; Juan F Dorado; Javier C Angulo Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-08-19 Impact factor: 4.964