MP88-12 EFFECTS OF RADIATION THERAPY ON DEVICE SURVIVAL AMONG INDIVIDUALS WITH ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTERS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Incontinence/Female Urology: Male Incontinence: Therapy1 Apr 2015MP88-12 EFFECTS OF RADIATION THERAPY ON DEVICE SURVIVAL AMONG INDIVIDUALS WITH ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTERS Marcelino Rivera, Matthew Ziegelmann, Brian Linder, Boyd Viers, Laureano Rangel, and Daniel Elliott Marcelino RiveraMarcelino Rivera More articles by this author , Matthew ZiegelmannMatthew Ziegelmann More articles by this author , Brian LinderBrian Linder More articles by this author , Boyd ViersBoyd Viers More articles by this author , Laureano RangelLaureano Rangel More articles by this author , and Daniel ElliottDaniel Elliott More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.1845AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Literature surrounding artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) device survival among individuals with a history of radiation therapy is conflicting with limited data to date. Therefore, we aim was to assess AUS device survival outcomes among individuals with prior radiation therapy exposure undergoing AUS placement. METHODS An institutional review board approved database of all AUS patients from 1999-2014 was utilized to assess device survival in patients who underwent radiotherapy compared to individuals without radiotherapy exposure. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine survival including overall device and erosion/infection-free survival. Hazard regression analysis was utilized to determine the association between radiation therapy and device outcomes. RESULTS From 1999-2014 a total of 1,153 patients underwent AUS surgery at our institution. Of these, a total of 650 underwent primary AUS placement with 285 (44%) having received radiation therapy. When compared with patients who did not receive radiation therapy those who did were older (median age 72.8 vs 70.2, p<0.0001), had a greater BMI (28.9 vs 28.1, p<0.0019), and higher rates of diabetes and hypertension (HTN) (p<0.02 and <0.009 respectively). On univariate analysis, only age was significantly associated with AUS overall device survival (HR 0.976, p<0.002). Likewise, survival analysis demonstrated no significant difference in 1 and 5-year overall device (88% vs 84% and 62% vs 57% respectively, p=0.5) and erosion/infection-free survival (94% vs 92% and 89% vs 89% respectively, p=0.7) rates among individuals who received radiation therapy relative to those without radiation therapy exposure. CONCLUSIONS While individuals who underwent radiation therapy were significantly older, had a higher BMI and higher rates of diabetes and HTN, device survival, as well as infection/erosion rates were not significantly different between the two groups. Clinically, these findings will assist the urologist with preoperative counseling of men undergoing primary AUS placement with a history of radiation therapy. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e1096-e1097 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Marcelino Rivera More articles by this author Matthew Ziegelmann More articles by this author Brian Linder More articles by this author Boyd Viers More articles by this author Laureano Rangel More articles by this author Daniel Elliott More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...