Abstract
Artificial urinary sphincter is considered the gold standard of treatment for male urinary incontinence because of intrinsic sphincter deficiency. The objective of our study was to compare the functional results and complications of the penoscrotal and perineal incision for the implantation of artificial urinary sphincter. A retrospective, monocentric study comparing the perioperative and long-term results of primary implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter in men, performed by the penoscrotal or the perineal incision, was conducted in a French university hospital. Between April 2004and February 2019, 175patients were implanted (118by penoscrotal incision and 57by perineal incision) by 19surgeons. Cuff placement approach depended on surgeon preference. The average follow-up was 34.2±35.6months. Cuff size was smaller in the penoscrotal group (4 [4;5] vs 4.5[4;5] p<0.001). At the end of follow-up, the rates of complete continence, social continence, reintervention for any reason, explantation, and revision was similar between the two groups. Long-term outcomes of penoscrotal and perineal artificial sphincter implantation were similar between the two groups. Prospective multicenter studies are needed to confirm these results.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Progres en urologie : journal de l'Association francaise d'urologie et de la Societe francaise d'urologie
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
