Outcomes Of Artificial Urinary Sphincter Research Articles

Neurological sphincter deficiency: is there a place for artificial urinary sphincter?

PurposeNeurogenic stress urinary incontinence (N-SUI) is a condition with serious impact on the quality of life. There are several treatment modalities of which the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) stands out as the most suitable technique for addressing sphincter insufficiency. In this article, the purpose is to describe practical considerations, outcomes, and complications of the artificial urinary sphincter in neurological sphincter deficiency in both males and females.MethodsA narrative review of the current literature.ResultsThe outcomes of AUS are reasonably good in patients with NLUTD, the surgical technique is discussed as well as the limitations and special considerations in this complex and heterogeneous patient population.ConclusionThe available evidence suggests that its efficacy and functional durability may be lower in patients with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (NLUTD) compared to those without neurological deficits. However, studies have shown that AUS can still provide effective and safe continence outcomes in both male and female patients, with long-term device survival rates ranging from several years to over a decade.

Prior male sling does not affect outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter.

To investigate the outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement in patients with post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPUI) with or without a prior male sling. We performed a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent AUS for PPUI from 2007 to 2022. The primary endpoint was to determine the proportion of patients who achieved social continence, defined as self-reported use of 0-1 pad/day. The secondary endpoints were device failure rates and device failure-free survival. The analysis included 210 patients, with 30 (14.3%) having had prior slings and 180 (85.7%) without prior slings. After AUS insertion, 80.0% of patients with prior slings and 76.7% of those without prior slings achieved continence (0-1 pad/day). There were six (20.0%) and 53 (29.4%) device failures in patients with and without prior slings, respectively. The median device failure-free survival was not reached in patients with prior slings and was 8.9 years in patients without prior slings (P = 0.048). Limitations include retrospective nature and small sample size. The efficacy and safety of AUS in patients with prior slings are similar to those without. Prior sling is associated with a longer device failure-free survival. AUS remains a viable option in patients who have persistent PPI after prior slings.

Outcomes of Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation in Patients with Detrusor Underactivity and Postprostatectomy Incontinence.

There is insufficient evidence for postoperative outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation for postprostatectomy incontinence (PPI) with detrusor underactivity (DU). Thus, we assessed the impact of preoperative DU on the outcomes of AUS implantation for PPI. Medical records of men who underwent AUS implantation for PPI were reviewed. Patients who had bladder outlet obstruction surgery before radical prostatectomy or AUS-related complications that required revision of AUS within three months were excluded. Patients were divided into two groups based on the preoperative urodynamic study including pressure flow study, a DU group, and a non-DU group. DU was defined as a bladder contractility index less than 100. The primary outcome was postoperative postvoid residual urine volume (PVR). The secondary outcomes included maximum flow rate (Qmax), postoperative satisfaction, and international prostate symptom score (IPSS). A total of 78 patients with PPI were assessed. The DU group consisted of 55 patients (70.5%) and the non-DU group comprised 23 patients (29.5%). Qmax was lower in the DU group than in the non-DU group and PVR was higher in the DU group as per a urodynamic study before AUS implantation. There was no significant difference in postoperative PVR between the two groups, although the Qmax after AUS implantation was significantly lower in the DU group. While the DU group showed significant improvements in Qmax, PVR, IPSS total score, IPSS storage subscore, and IPSS quality of life (QoL) score after AUS implantation, the non-DU group showed postoperative improvement in IPSS QoL score. There was no clinically significant impact of preoperative DU on the outcome of AUS implantation for PPI; thus, surgery can be safely performed in patients with PPI and DU.

Is the Standard Artificial Urinary Sphincter AMS 800 Still a Treatment Option for the Irradiated Male Patient Presenting with a Devastated Bladder Outlet?

Circular urethral compression with an artificial sphincter allows control of voiding, even in patients with severe stress urinary incontinence, but it heightens the risk of urethral atrophy and erosion. This study of one of the largest populations of patients treated with radiotherapy investigates the additive effect of the post-radiogenic stricture of the membranous urethra/bladder neck on AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter outcomes. In a retrospective multicenter cohort study, we analyzed patients fitted with an AMS 800, comparing those who had received radiotherapy with patients presenting a devastated bladder outlet (stricture of the membranous urethra/bladder neck). We determined the correlation between these groups of patients using both univariate and stepwise adjusted multivariate regression. The revision-free interval was estimated by a Kaplan-Meier plot and compared by applying the log-rank test. A p value below 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Of the 123 irradiated patients we identified, 62 (50.4%) had undergone at least one prior desobstruction for bladder-neck/urethra stenosis. After a mean follow-up of 21 months, the latter tended to achieve social continence less frequently (25.7% vs. 35%; p = 0.08). Revision was required significantly more often for this group (43.1% vs. 26.3%; p = 0.05) due to urethral erosion in 18 of 25 cases. A stenosis recurred in five cases; desobstruction was performed in two cases, leading to erosion in both. Multivariate analysis revealed a significantly higher risk of revision when recurrent stenosis necessitated at least two prior desobstructions (HR 2.8; p = 0.003). A devastated bladder outlet is associated with a lower proportion of men with social continence and a significantly higher need for revision compared with irradiated patients without a history of urethral stenosis. Alternative surgical procedures should be discussed beforehand, especially in cases of recurrent urethral stenosis.

(445) A Full Bladder Is Not Needed To Grade Male Stress Incontinence For Prosthesis Patient Selection

Abstract Introduction Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) resulting from prostate surgery can have devastating consequences in men’s quality of life. Patient selection is crucial for successful treatment of SUI with urethral sling or artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). The ideal SUI evaluation tool for determining severity and guiding surgical treatment remains unknown. The Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale (MSIGS) uses a standing cough test to provide a simple, non-invasive assessment of post-prostatectomy SUI severity, and can facilitate procedure selection. However, uncertainty remains as to whether MSIGS underestimates SUI severity if performed with insufficiently full bladder, increasing the risk of treatment failure. Objective We present our sling and AUS outcomes using the MSIGS for selection. We assessed bladder fullness with random bladder scans (BS) at the time of evaluation to determine if emptier bladder carries increased risk of failure. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of male patients undergoing sling and AUS placement. MSIGS and BS were documented at initial evaluation. Additional collected data included age, pads per day (PPD) pre- and post-surgery, post-operative MSIGS, and need for revision or conversion. Success and failure groups were defined as the post-operative use of ≤1 PPD or >1 PPD, respectively. Descriptive and comparative statistics were performed using SAS software. Results From April 2017 to September 2021, 40 male patients underwent sling and 43 naïve AUS placement. Average age was 71.9 for slings and 70.3 for AUS. 80/83 had prior prostatic surgery. Average follow up was 12.5 months. 34/40 slings had complete SUI resolution or reduction of pad use to no more than one PPD vs 40/43 of AUS (85 vs 93%, p=0.4). 4 sling patients (10%) had persistence or recurrence of SUI, of whichone patient underwent AUS placement. MSIGS scores were similar between sling success (83% patients grade 0, 3% grade 1, 14% grade 2) and failure groups (67% grade 0, 33% grade 1). 73% of AUS patient mostly had MSIGS scores 3 or 4. BS was available for 35 sling and 25 AUS patients. Average was 18.5cc in the sling failure group (range 17-161) and 38cc in the sling success, (17-161), with 32% of success patients having a BS of 0cc, and 80% of <60cc. Average BS for AUS patients was 45cc (14-224). 10 patients with BS 0 and 7 patients with BS<30cc demonstrated MSIGS 4 on exam. Conclusions MSIGS is a non-invasive, reliable test to assess SUI severity. Our preliminary data suggests that a full bladder at time of assessment is not necessary to accurately select patients for male sling vs AUS, with high rate of success and patient satisfaction. Disclosure No

Efficacy, Safety, and Reoperation-free Survival of Artificial Urinary Sphincter in Non-neurological Male Patients over 75 Years of Age

BackgroundArtificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is a gold standard treatment in male stress urinary incontinence but remains poorly used in elderly patients. ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy, safety, and reoperation-free survival of AUS implantation in male patients over 75 yr of age. Design, setting, and participantsWe retrospectively reviewed the charts of all 1233 non-neurological male AUS implantations between 2005 and 2020 at 13 French centers. We compared 330 patients ≥75 yr old (GROUP75+) with 903 patients <75 yr old (GROUP75–) at the time of AUS implantation. Outcome measurements and statistical analysisOur primary endpoint was social continence at 3 mo defined as the use of one or fewer pad daily. We used Kaplan-Meier analyses to assess reoperation-free survival. We sought factors of erosion using logistic regression. Results and limitationsEarly postoperative continence was comparable in both groups (74.4% vs 80.1%, p = 0.114). We observed a higher rate of postoperative complications in GROUP75+ (18.8% vs 12.6%, p = 0.014), but the complications were more frequently of low grade in GROUP75+ (p = 0.025). The overall reoperation-free survival was similar (p = 0.076) after a median follow-up of 2 yr. However, patients in GROUP75+ had poorer explantation-free survival (p < 0.0001). A history of radiotherapy was a predictive factor of erosion (odds ratio [OR] = 5.31, p < 0.01), but age was not (OR = 1.08, p = 0.87). Unfortunately, our dataset did not include a systematic geriatric evaluation. ConclusionsAUS in elderly patients appears to be an effective option to treat stress urinary incontinence. However, we observed more postoperative complications and explantations, although age was not associated with the onset of erosion. A prospective study is required to determine whether a geriatric evaluation would be an effective strategy to select patients before surgery. Patient summaryIn this study, we looked at outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter in elderly men in a large population. We found satisfying efficacy but slightly more postoperative complications and device infections.

O047 Outcomes of bulbar artificial urinary sphincter in older men following prostate cancer

Abstract Introduction The gold standard treatment for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in men is a bulbar artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). With an aging population, we must ensure efficacious solutions for older men with SUI are available. Our study assessed whether age influenced the outcomes of AUS for SUI post-prostate cancer (PCa) treatment. Methods Retrospective notes review of all patients having AUS for SUI following PCa treatment between 2006-2019. A 7-point Patient Global Impression of Improvement assessment (PGII) comparing pre-operative and post-operative conditions (1: very much better, 4: the same and 7: very much worse). This was completed a minimum of 6 months following AUS insertion. PGII score of 1 or 2 was recorded as a successful AUS. Older men were defined as ≥75 years. Statistical analysis was via Students T-Test, Chi-Square, and Mann Whitney with significance determined as P&amp;lt;0.5. Results 184 men, median 69 years (range 31-87) were included. 150 men were aged &amp;lt;75 years and 34 were ≥75 years. Patients had prior prostatectomy and/or radiotherapy. No significant difference in median PGII score (score 2) or overall AUS success between the 2 groups. Overall AUS success was 73.3% in &amp;lt;75 years and 73.5% in ≥75 years. Conclusions No significant difference was seen in success between older and younger men. Bulbar AUS had an overall success rate of 73.4%, described as very much improved or much improved condition, a minimum of 6 months after insertion. Older age should not be a deterrent to offering AUS surgery.

Artificial Urinary Sphincter Outcomes and Durability: Equivalent Surgical Success Among Diverse Patient Characteristics

Vasan, Robin MBBS; Miller, David MD; Patnaik, Shyam MD; Taylor, Cory MD; Morrill, Christian BS; Rusilko, Paul J DO, FACS Author Information

MP22-06 THE IMPACT OF PROSTATE CANCER DISEASE PROGRESSION AND SALVAGE OR ADJUVANT TREATMENT ON ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTER DEVICE OUTCOMES

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 May 2022MP22-06 THE IMPACT OF PROSTATE CANCER DISEASE PROGRESSION AND SALVAGE OR ADJUVANT TREATMENT ON ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTER DEVICE OUTCOMES Shree Agrawal, Hanson Zhao, Joao Pedro Emrich Accioly, Hadley Wood, and Kenneth Angermeier Shree AgrawalShree Agrawal More articles by this author , Hanson ZhaoHanson Zhao More articles by this author , Joao Pedro Emrich AcciolyJoao Pedro Emrich Accioly More articles by this author , Hadley WoodHadley Wood More articles by this author , and Kenneth AngermeierKenneth Angermeier More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002561.06AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: While utilization of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) for post prostate cancer intervention incontinence can improve quality of life, AUS placement in men with prostate cancer (CaP) progression to biochemical recurrence (BR) or distant metastatic disease (DM) with respect to AUS outcomes has yet to be characterized. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients who underwent AUS implantation from 1/2009-8/2021 was performed. Demographics, comorbidities, CaP treatment, pathology, progression, timing of AUS following primary intervention, surgical characteristics, incontinence outcomes and device revisions were assessed by chi-square and Pearson’s t-test analyses. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards and Kaplan Meier models were used to assess time to AUS device revision by CaP progression. RESULTS: We identified 526 patients who underwent AUS implantation, 255 had complete CaP and AUS characteristics as summarized in the table. Mean follow up from AUS and primary CaP treatment was 56 and 118 months, respectively. Among 134 patients treated with radiation, 40 developed AUS complications with 11 erosions and 11 with recurrent incontinence (p=0.21). In 78 patients treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), AUS complications were noted in 22 with 7 erosions and 6 with recurrent incontinence, prompting revision (p=0.77). BR occurred in 101 patients (40%), with 16% requiring AUS revision (p=0.92). DM developed in 28 patients (11%), with 8 undergoing AUS after DM diagnosis. On univariate analysis, only transcorporal cuff use [HR 3.6 (95% CI 1.7-7.3), p=0.001] significantly correlated with AUS revision.There was no significant difference in continence rates following AUS for patients who underwent prostatectomy, radiation therapy, ADT, or who developed BR or DM. A majority (76%) reported 0-1 pads/day at last follow up. AUS durability for those with BR, by 2 years was 92%, 5 years 85%, and by 10 years 60% (p=0.55). In DM, this was 96% by 2 years, 90% by 5 years, and 71% by 10 years (p=0.26). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in AUS outcomes between patients without CaP disease progression and those with BR, local recurrence, or DM. Based on this data, AUS implantation in patients undergoing salvage or adjuvant therapy may still be an effective procedure. Source of Funding: None © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 207Issue Supplement 5May 2022Page: e373 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Shree Agrawal More articles by this author Hanson Zhao More articles by this author Joao Pedro Emrich Accioly More articles by this author Hadley Wood More articles by this author Kenneth Angermeier More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ...

Artificial urinary sphincter in patients with urinary incontinence after High Intensity Focused ultrasound

Urinary incontinence after High Intensity Focused ultrasound (HIFU) is a poorly documented issue. To our knowledge, no study has evaluated the outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) after HIFU. The aim of this study was to evaluate the functional outcomes of AUS for post-HIFU urinary incontinence. The charts of all male patients who underwent an AUS implantation between 2004 and 2020 in 13 centers were reviewed retrospectively. Only men with a history of HIFU were included. The primary endpoint was social continence at 3 months defined as wearing 0 to 1 pad per day. Out of 1318 procedures, nine men were implanted with an AUS after HIFU including four men with an history of pelvic irradiation: 3 pelvic radiation therapy and 1 prostatic brachytherapy. The patients were divided into two groups, 5 in the HIFU group without a history of pelvic irradiation, 4 patients in the HIRX group with a history of pelvic irradiation. The median age was 74 years (IQR 71-76). There was no perioperative complication. The median follow-up was 47.5 (IQR 25-85.5) months. Social continence at 3 months was 75% in the total cohort: 80% in the HIFU group and 67% in the HIRX group. AUS implantation may provide satisfactory long-term functional outcomes in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence resulting from HIFU. Larger series are needed to confirm these findings. 4.

Artificial urinary sphincter outcomes for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence. A narrative review

Urinary incontinence post-radical prostatectomy is a common complication that might negatively impact patients’ quality of life. Treatments include medical and surgical options, being the insertion of an artificial urethral sphincter (AUS) the gold standard. The aim of this narrative review is to evaluate the outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter implantation for urinary incontinence developed post-radical prostatectomy with and without radiation, in terms of urinary continence and complications. The MEDLINE and Scopus search returned 477 articles. A total of eleven articles were included for qualitative analysis. A total of 707 men that met the inclusion criteria were included. The 22.6% of the men (160 patients) received pelvic external beam radiotherapy prior to the implantation of the artificial urinary sphincter. The overall continence success rate was defined by the use of pads. Some authors reported a success rate of 0 pads per day (PPD) or ≤ 1 PPD in the last follow-up. The complications included urethral atrophy, mechanical failure, revision and/or removal of the device, infection and erosion. Further prospective studies should be done to clarify continence concepts after the placement of an AUS and long-term complications.

Prior Placement of Male Urethral Slings Can Increase the Need for Revision of Artificial Urinary Sphincters.

Background: Recurrent stress urinary incontinence (SUI) following male sling can be managed surgically with artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) insertion. Prior small, single-center retrospective studies have not demonstrated an association between having failed a sling procedure and worse AUS outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of primary AUS placement in men who had or had not undergone a previous sling procedure. Methods: A retrospective review of all AUS devices implanted at a single academic center during 2000–2018 was performed. After excluding secondary AUS placements, revision and explant procedures, 135 patients were included in this study, of which 19 (14.1%) patients had undergone prior sling procedures. Results: There was no significant difference in demographic characteristics between patients undergoing AUS placement with or without a prior sling procedure. Average follow up time was 28.0 months. Prior sling was associated with shorter overall device survival, with an increased likelihood of requiring revision or replacement of the device (OR 4.2 (1.3–13.2), p = 0.015) as well as reoperation for any reason (OR 3.5 (1.2–9.9), p = 0.019). While not statistically significant, patients with a prior sling were more likely to note persistent incontinence at most recent follow up (68.8% vs. 42.7%, p = 0.10). Conclusions: Having undergone a prior sling procedure is associated with shorter device survival and need for revision or replacement surgery. When considering patients for sling procedures, patients should be counseled regarding the potential for worse AUS outcomes should they require additional anti-incontinence procedures following a failed sling.

Impact of radiation therapy on artificial urinary sphincter implantation in male patients: A multicenter study.

To evaluate the impact of an history of radiation therapy on the outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in male patients. The charts of all patients who underwent AUS implantation for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after prostate surgery in thirteen centers between 2004 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. We excluded patients with neurogenic SUI. Continence rates and incidence of complications, revision and cuff erosion were evaluated. The outcomes in irradiated men were compared to those of non irradiated men. A total of 1277 patients who had an AUS met the inclusion criteria with a median age of 70 years, of which 437 had an history of prior radiotherapy. There was no difference in comorbidities. In irradiated patients, postoperative social continence, urethral atrophy and infection rates were respectively 75.6%, 2.4% and 9.5% and 76.8%, 5.4%, and 5.8% in nonirradiated men (respectively, p = 0.799, p = 0.128, p = 0.148). There were more urethral erosion in irradiated male patients. After a mean follow up of 36.8 months, the explantation free survival was poorer in irradiated patients (p = 0.001). These data suggest that pelvic radiotherapy before AUS adversely affect device survival with and increased greater occurrence of infection-erosion and therefore of explantation.

Early Efficacy and Safety Outcomes of Artificial Urinary Sphincter for Stress Urinary Incontinence Following Radical Prostatectomy or Benign Prostatic Obstruction Surgery: Results of a Large Multicentric Study

BackgroundArtificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard for the management of moderate to severe stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in the male population. While outcomes of this device in postprostatectomy incontinence (PPI) are widely described, those obtained for incontinence after benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) surgery remains poorly explored. ObjectiveTo compare continence outcomes after AUS implantation in a PPI population with those obtained in men incontinent after BPO surgery. Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective review of all cases of AUS implantation between 2005 and 2020 in 16 different French centers was conducted. Only patients with primary implantation whose indication was moderate to severe SUI after prostatectomy or BPO surgery were included (excluding those with a history of radiation therapy, brachytherapy, cystectomy, high-intensity focused ultrasound therapy, or neurogenic disease). Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe primary endpoint was the rate of social continence (zero or one pad per day) at 3 mo. Complications were also noted within 90 d of implantation. Results and limitationsA total of 417 patients were included in the PPI group and 50 in the BPO surgery group. Social continence rates at 3 mo were similar between the groups (79% vs 72%, p = 0.701). Complication rate was significantly higher in the BPO group (8% vs 18%, p = 0.044). The same was found for the Clavien-Dindo type 2 complication rate (20.6% vs 44.4%, p = 0.026). The retrospective nature and lack of precise definition of incontinence are the main limitations of this study. ConclusionsThis multicentric study strengthens the position of AUS as gold standard for SUI after radical prostatectomy. Comparable efficacy results were found for incontinence after BPO surgery, with nevertheless a higher rate of complications. Patient summaryArtificial urinary sphincter represents the gold standard for the treatment of moderate to severe stress urinary incontinence. Efficacy results are comparable between postprostatectomy incontinence and incontinence after benign prostatic obstruction surgery.

Long-term functional outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter (AMS 800™) implantation in women aged over 75years and suffering from stress urinary incontinence caused by intrinsic sphincter deficiency.

To assess the outcomes after artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in older women aged over 75years. A monocentric retrospective study included all non-neurological women aged over 75years suffering from stress urinary incontinence (SUI) due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency and undergoing an AUS placement between 1991 and 2015. Early postoperative complications were reported according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Continence, defined as no pad use, was assessed at the end of follow-up. Explantation, revision and deactivation rates of the AUS were reported. A Kaplan-Meier survival curve was generated to evaluate the survival rate of the device without revision or explantation. Among 393 AUS implantations, a total of 45 patients, median age 77years (IQR 75-79), were included. Twenty-six early postoperative complications occurred in 18 patients (40%) patients. All were minor Clavien grades (I-II) except one (grade IVa). Median follow-up was 36months (IQR 16-96). Overall, 32 women (71.1%) still had their AUS in place at the end of the follow-up, without revision or explantation. The AUS was definitively removed in four (8.9%). The AUS required revisions in nine (20%) women. The 5- and 10-year survival rates of the device without revision or explantation were 78 and 50%, respectively. Three patients (6.7%) had their AUS deactivated. At last follow-up, in an intention-to-treat analysis, the continence rate was 68.9%. In women aged over 75-years-old, suffering from SUI, the AUS provides satisfactory functional results comparable to the general population.

A comparison of artificial urinary sphincter outcomes after primary implantation and first revision surgery

ObjectiveThe artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard for severe male stress urinary incontinence, though evaluations of specific predictors for device outcomes are sparse. We sought to compare outcomes between primary and revision AUS surgery for non-infectious failures. MethodsWe identified 2045 consecutive AUS surgeries at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN, USA) from 1983 to 2013. Of these, 1079 were primary AUS implantations and 281 were initial revision surgeries, which comprised our study group. Device survival rates, including overall and specific rates for device infection/erosion, urethral atrophy and mechanical failure, were compared between primary AUS placements versus revision surgeries. Patient follow-up was obtained through office examination, written correspondence, or telephone correspondence. ResultsDuring the study period, 1079 (79.3%) patients had a primary AUS placement and 281 (20.7%) patients underwent a first revision surgery for mechanical failure or urethral atrophy. Patients undergoing revision surgery were found to have adverse 1- and 5-year AUS device survival on Kaplan–Meier analysis, 90% vs. 85% and 74% vs. 61%, respectively (p<0.001). Specifically, revision surgery was associated with a significantly increased cumulative incidence of explantation for device infection/urethral erosion (4.2% vs. 7.5% at 1 year; p=0.02), with similar rates of repeat surgery for mechanical failure (p=0.43) and urethral atrophy (p=0.77). ConclusionsOur findings suggest a significantly higher rate of overall device failure following revision AUS surgery, which is likely secondary to an increased rate of infection/urethral erosion events.

Long-term outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter in female patients with spina bifida.

To report the long-term functional outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in female patients with spinal dysraphism and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) related to intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD). The charts of all spina bifida female patients with SUI due to ISD who underwent AUS (AMS 800) implantation between 2005 and 2019 at three academic departments of urology were retrospectively reviewed. Reoperation was defined as either revision or explantation of the AUS device. Reoperation-free survival of the AUS device was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Continence status as per patients' subjective assessment was categorized as follows: complete continence (no pads), improved continence, unchanged SUI or worsened SUI. Twenty-three patients were included, 69.6% were self-catheterizing. The median follow-up was 14 years. Median time to first reoperation was 10 years. Survival rates without reoperation were 85.9%, 41.8%, 34.6%, and 20.9% at 5, 10, 15, 20 years, respectively. Survival rates without AUS explantation were 90.7%, 66.3%, 55.2%, and 41.4% at 5, 10, 15, 20 years, respectively. None of the patients who underwent device explantation had a new AUS implanted. The only predictive factor of reoperation-free survival was the type of spinal dysraphism (hazards ratio = 3.60 for closed vs. open dysraphism; p = .04). At last follow-up, 17 of the 23 patients were fully continent (73.9%). AUS in female patients with spina bifida may be associated with satisfactory long-term functional outcomes and a high reoperation rate. The median time to first reoperation was similar to what is reported in the male AUS literature (10 years).

Current Use of the Artificial Urinary Sphincter in Adult Females.

The aim of the present report was to review the recent evidences regarding the use of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in adult females. While the excellent functional outcomes of AUS in female patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD) have been reported for decades, its use has remained confidential in most countries likely due to its challenging implantation and inherent morbidity. Over the past few years, laparoscopic and, more recently, robotic techniques of AUS implantation in female patients have been described with promising perioperative outcomes. As a result, the use of AUS has increased in several countries. The indications are mostly recurrent or persistent SUI after previous anti-incontinence procedures and neurogenic SUI. Owing to its unique potential to restore continence while maintaining low outlet resistance during the voiding phase, AUS may be of special interest in female patients with detrusor underactivity. High level of evidence data from trials which are underway, along with developments in robotic surgery and technological refinements of the device, may well, almost 50years after its introduction, give to the AUS its momentum as a major contributor in the female SUI armamentarium. While the use of AUS in female patients has been restricted to some countries and a few high-volume centers, it has started spreading again over the past few years, thanks to the rise of minimally invasive approaches which facilitate its implantation, and this is yielding promising outcomes.

443 - Long-term outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter in female patients with spina bifida

443 - Long-term outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter in female patients with spina bifida

Improved artificial urinary sphincter outcomes using a transcorporal cuff placement in patients with a "fragile urethra".

The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the most effective treatment option for incontinence after prostate cancer treatment. However, patients with a "fragile urethra" (defined as prior radiotherapy, previous failed AUS, or previous urethroplasty) are at increased risk of AUS failure. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes using standard and transcorporal cuff placement in this group of patients. A retrospective review was performed on patients with a fragile urethra who underwent AUS insertion between 2004 and 2017. The primary outcome was the need for AUS revision. Secondary outcome measures included change in pad use, patient satisfaction, continence (≤1 pad/day), improvement (≥50% change in pad use), and cuff erosion rates. Seventy-six patients met the criteria for inclusion, with a mean age of 71.6 years and a mean followup of 37.9 months. A total of 42.1% had prior radiotherapy, 56.6% had a history of failed AUS, and 19.7% had previous urethroplasty. Transcorporal cuff placement was performed in 31.6% (n=24). These patients had lower revision (20.8% vs. 36.5%; p=0.05) and erosion rates (8.3% vs. 17.3%; p=0.09). There was no significant difference in functional outcomes such as continence (66.7% vs. 73.1%; p=0.57), improvement (100% vs. 90.4%;p=0.17), or satisfaction (82.6% vs. 69.4%; p=0.26), nor for 90-day complications (4.2% vs. 9.6%; p=0.41). AUS insertion is an effective treatment option for post-prostatectomy incontinence in the setting of a fragile urethra. Transcorporal cuff placement in this subset of patients may be recommended, as it is associated with lower revision and erosion rates compared to standard cuff placement.