13 Years of Experience With Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation at Baylor College of Medicine

No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult urology1 Mar 200713 Years of Experience With Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation at Baylor College of Medicine H. Henry Lai, Elias I. Hsu, Bin S. Teh, E. Brian Butler, and Timothy B. Boone H. Henry LaiH. Henry Lai Scott Department of Urology, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas , Elias I. HsuElias I. Hsu Scott Department of Urology, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas , Bin S. TehBin S. Teh Department of Radiology, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas Baylor College of Medicine and Department of Radiotherapy, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas , E. Brian ButlerE. Brian Butler Baylor College of Medicine and Department of Radiotherapy, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas , and Timothy B. BooneTimothy B. Boone Scott Department of Urology, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas Baylor College of Medicine and Department of Radiotherapy, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2006.10.062AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: We reviewed 13 years of experience with artificial urinary sphincter implantation (narrow backed cuff) at a single institution. Materials and Methods: Between 1992 and 2005, 270 patients underwent artificial urinary sphincter implantation, as performed by a single surgeon at Baylor College of Medicine, and followup data were available on 218 of them. Mean followup was 36.5 months (maximum 151.4). Of the 218 patients 60 underwent prostatectomy and pelvic radiation, 116 underwent prostatectomy without radiotherapy, 11 had neurogenic bladder and 31 underwent secondary artificial urinary sphincter implantation. Results: The complication rate did not differ among the 4 treatment groups. Complication rates were infection in 5.5% of cases, erosion in 6.0%, urethral atrophy in 9.6%, mechanical failure in 6.0% and surgical removal or revision in 27.1%. Median time to complications was 3.7 months for infection, 19.8 months for erosion, 29.6 months for atrophy, 68.1 months for failure and 14.4 months for surgery. At 5 years 75% of patients were free from revision or removal. A history of failed injectable or male sling, or of Valsalva voiding did not adversely impact the outcome. The rate of bladder neck contracture was high in artificial urinary sphincter candidates, especially in irradiated patients (36% and 57%, respectively). Patients with prior pelvic radiation continued to be at higher risk for contracture recurrence after artificial urinary sphincter implantation (12%). Two-stage UroLume® stent and artificial urinary sphincter placement offered long-term contracture and continence control in 8 of 11 patients with recurrent anastomotic contractures. Conclusions: An artificial urinary sphincter is durable treatment for sphincter deficiency even in patients with a history of complications, neurogenic bladder, pelvic radiation, bladder neck contracture, Valsalva voiding, or failed injectables or slings. References 1 : Treatment of urinary incontinence by implantable prosthetic sphincter. Urology1973; 1: 252. Google Scholar 2 : Transurethral collagen injections for male intrinsic sphincter deficiency: the University of Texas-Houston experience. J Urol2005; 174: 994. Link, Google Scholar 3 : Carbon coated zirconium beads in beta-glucan gel and bovine glutaraldehyde cross-linked collagen infections for intrinsic sphincter deficiency: continence and satisfaction after extended followup. J Urol2004; 171: 1152. Link, Google Scholar 4 : The male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence: mean followup of 18 months. J Urol2005; 173: 1657. Link, Google Scholar 5 : Use of the artificial urinary sphincter in men and women. World J Urol1997; 15: 316. Google Scholar 6 : Mayo Clinic long-term analysis of the functional durability of the AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter: a review of 323 cases. J Urol1998; 159: 1206. Link, Google Scholar 7 : The long-term outcome of artificial urinary sphincters. J Urol2000; 164: 702. Link, Google Scholar 8 : Artificial urinary sphincter for post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: long-term subjective results. J Urol2001; 166: 1755. Link, Google Scholar 9 : Outcomes following revisions and secondary implantation of the artificial urinary sphincter. J Urol2005; 173: 1242. Link, Google Scholar 10 : Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter cuff placement in cases requiring revision for erosion and urethral atrophy. J Urol2002; 167: 2075. Link, Google Scholar 11 : A comparison of the functional durability of the AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter between cases with and without an underlying neurogenic aetiology. Ir J Med Sci2003; 172: 136. Google Scholar 12 : Artificial sphincter insertion after radiotherapy: is it worthwhile?. BJU Int2000; 85: 490. Google Scholar 13 : Artificial urinary sphincter for post-prostatectomy incontinence in men who had prior radiotherapy: a risk and outcome analysis. J Urol2002; 167: 591. Link, Google Scholar 14 : Successful outcome of artificial urinary sphincter in men with post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence despite adverse implantation features. J Urol1992; 148: 1166. Abstract, Google Scholar 15 : Artificial urinary sphincter in patients following major pelvic surgery and/or radiotherapy: are they less favorable candidates?. J Urol1995; 153: 1188. Link, Google Scholar 16 : Management of urinary incontinence after prostatectomy with the artificial urinary sphincter. J Urol1989; 142: 302. Link, Google Scholar 17 : Artificial urinary sphincter implantation in the irradiated patients: safety, efficacy, and satisfaction. BJU Int2002; 89: 364. Google Scholar 18 : Sphincteric incontinence: the primary cause of post-prostatectomy incontinence in patients with prostate cancer. Neurourol Urodyn1997; 16: 153. Google Scholar 19 : Combined stent and artificial urinary sphincter for management of severe recurrent bladder neck contracture and stress incontinence after prostatectomy: a long-term evaluation. J Urol2001; 165: 413. Link, Google Scholar 20 : Anastomatic contracture and incontinence after radical prostatectomy: a graded approach to management. J Urol2005; 173: 1143. Link, Google Scholar © 2007 by American Urological AssociationFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByPatel N, Golan R, Halpern J, Sun T, Asafu-Adjei A, Chughtai B, Stahl P, Sedrakyan A and Kashanian J (2018) A Contemporary Analysis of Dual Inflatable Penile Prosthesis and Artificial Urinary Sphincter OutcomesJournal of Urology, VOL. 201, NO. 1, (141-146), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2019.Sandhu J, Breyer B, Comiter C, Eastham J, Gomez C, Kirages D, Kittle C, Lucioni A, Nitti V, Stoffel J, Westney O, Murad M and McCammon K (2019) Incontinence after Prostate Treatment: AUA/SUFU GuidelineJournal of Urology, VOL. 202, NO. 2, (369-378), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2019.Doiron R, Saavedra A, Haines T, Nadeau G, Tu L, Morisset J, Steele S, Valiquette L, Elterman D, Maciejewski C and Rourke K (2019) Canadian Experience with the Adjustable Transobturator Male System for Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence: A Multicenter StudyJournal of Urology, VOL. 202, NO. 5, (1022-1028), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2019.Kaiho Y, Masuda H, Takei M, Hirayama T, Mitsui T, Yokoyama M, Kitta T, Kawamorita N, Nakagawa H, Iwamura M and Arai Y (2018) Surgical and Patient Reported Outcomes of Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational StudyJournal of Urology, VOL. 199, NO. 1, (245-250), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2018.Kaufman M, Milam D, Johnsen N, Cleves M, Broghammer J, Brant W, Jones L, Brady J, Gross M and Henry G (2018) Prior Radiation Therapy Decreases Time to Idiopathic Erosion of Artificial Urinary Sphincter: A Multi-Institutional AnalysisJournal of Urology, VOL. 199, NO. 4, (1037-1041), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2018.Radomski S, Ruzhynsky V, Wallis C and Herschorn S (2018) Complications and Interventions in Patients with an Artificial Urinary Sphincter: Long-Term ResultsJournal of Urology, VOL. 200, NO. 5, (1093-1098), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2018.Moser D, Kaufman M, Milam D, Johnsen N, Cleves M, Broghammer J, Brant W, Jones L, Brady J, Gross M, Jani K and Henry G (2018) Impact of Radiation and Transcorporeal Artificial Sphincter Placement in Patients with Prior Urethral Cuff Erosion: Results from a Retrospective Multicenter AnalysisJournal of Urology, VOL. 200, NO. 6, (1338-1343), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2018.Yafi F, DeLay K, Stewart C, Chiang J, Sangkum P and Hellstrom W (2016) Device Survival after Primary Implantation of an Artificial Urinary Sphincter for Male Stress Urinary IncontinenceJournal of Urology, VOL. 197, NO. 3 Part 1, (759-765), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2017.Wein A (2018) Re: A Systematic Approach to the Evaluation and Management of the Failed Artificial Urinary SphincterJournal of Urology, VOL. 198, NO. 6, (1216-1216), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2017.Linder B, Viers B, Ziegelmann M, Rivera M, Rangel L and Elliott D (2018) Artificial Urinary Sphincter Mechanical Failures—Is it Better to Replace the Entire Device or Just the Malfunctioning Component?Journal of Urology, VOL. 195, NO. 5, (1523-1528), Online publication date: 1-May-2016.Rivera M, Linder B, Ziegelmann M, Viers B, Rangel L and Elliott D (2015) The Impact of Prior Radiation Therapy on Artificial Urinary Sphincter Device SurvivalJournal of Urology, VOL. 195, NO. 4 Part 1, (1033-1037), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2016.Viers B, Linder B, Rivera M, Rangel L, Ziegelmann M and Elliott D (2018) Long-Term Quality of Life and Functional Outcomes among Primary and Secondary Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantations in Men with Stress Urinary IncontinenceJournal of Urology, VOL. 196, NO. 3, (838-843), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2016.Masterson J and Rhee E (2018) Post-Prostatectomy Male Sling Revision and Early ResultsUrology Practice, VOL. 3, NO. 1, (36-40), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2016.Simhan J, Morey A, Singla N, Tausch T, Scott J, Lemack G and Roehrborn C (2018) 3.5 cm Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff Erosion Occurs Predominantly in Irradiated PatientsJournal of Urology, VOL. 193, NO. 2, (593-597), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2015.Singla N, Siegel J, Simhan J, Tausch T, Klein A, Thoreson G and Morey A (2018) Does Pressure Regulating Balloon Location Make a Difference in Functional Outcomes of Artificial Urinary Sphincter?Journal of Urology, VOL. 194, NO. 1, (202-206), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2015.Linder B, Piotrowski J, Ziegelmann M, Rivera M, Rangel L and Elliott D (2018) Perioperative Complications following Artificial Urinary Sphincter PlacementJournal of Urology, VOL. 194, NO. 3, (716-720), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2015.Selph J, Belsante M, Gupta S, Ajay D, Lentz A, Webster G, Le N and Peterson A (2018) The Ohmmeter Identifies the Site of Fluid Leakage during Artificial Urinary Sphincter Revision SurgeryJournal of Urology, VOL. 194, NO. 4, (1043-1048), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2015.Mock S, Dmochowski R, Brown E, Reynolds W, Kaufman M and Milam D (2018) The Impact of Urethral Risk Factors on Transcorporeal Artificial Urinary Sphincter Erosion Rates and Device SurvivalJournal of Urology, VOL. 194, NO. 6, (1692-1696), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2015.Rothschild J, Chang Kit L, Seltz L, Wang L, Kaufman M, Dmochowski R and Milam D (2018) Difference between Urethral Circumference and Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff Size, and its Effect on Postoperative IncontinenceJournal of Urology, VOL. 191, NO. 1, (138-142), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2014.Linder B, de Cogain M and Elliott D (2018) Long-Term Device Outcomes of Artificial Urinary Sphincter Reimplantation Following Prior Explantation for Erosion or InfectionJournal of Urology, VOL. 191, NO. 3, (734-738), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2014.Simhan J, Morey A, Zhao L, Tausch T, Scott J, Hudak S and Mazzarella B (2018) Decreasing Need for Artificial Urinary Sphincter Revision Surgery by Precise Cuff Sizing in Men with Spongiosal AtrophyJournal of Urology, VOL. 192, NO. 3, (798-803), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2014.Sandhu J (2018) Management of Complications and Residual Symptoms in Men with an Artificial Urinary SphincterJournal of Urology, VOL. 192, NO. 2, (303-304), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2014.McGeady J, McAninch J, Truesdale M, Blaschko S, Kenfield S and Breyer B (2018) Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement in Compromised Urethras and Survival: A Comparison of Virgin, Radiated and Reoperative CasesJournal of Urology, VOL. 192, NO. 6, (1756-1761), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2014.Yeung L, Grewal S, Bullock A, Lai H and Brandes S (2018) A Comparison of Chlorhexidine-Alcohol Versus Povidone-Iodine for Eliminating Skin Flora Before Genitourinary Prosthetic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled TrialJournal of Urology, VOL. 189, NO. 1, (136-140), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2013.Lai H and Boone T (2018) The Surgical Learning Curve of Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation: Implications for Prosthetic Training and ReferralJournal of Urology, VOL. 189, NO. 4, (1437-1443), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2013.Comiter C, Nitti V, Elliot C and Rhee E (2018) A New Quadratic Sling for Male Stress Incontinence: Retrograde Leak Point Pressure as a Measure of Urethral ResistanceJournal of Urology, VOL. 187, NO. 2, (563-568), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2012.Lai H and Boone T (2018) Complex Artificial Urinary Sphincter Revision and Reimplantation Cases—How do They Fare Compared to Virgin Cases?Journal of Urology, VOL. 187, NO. 3, (951-955), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2012.Hudak S and Morey A (2018) Impact of 3.5 cm Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff on Primary and Revision Surgery for Male Stress Urinary IncontinenceJournal of Urology, VOL. 186, NO. 5, (1962-1966), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2011.Schlomer B, Dugi D, Valadez C and Morey A (2018) Correlation of Penile and Bulbospongiosus Measurements: Implications for Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff PlacementJournal of Urology, VOL. 183, NO. 4, (1474-1478), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2010.Henry G, Graham S, Cornell R, Cleves M, Simmons C, Vakalopoulos I and Flynn B (2018) A Multicenter Study on the Perineal Versus Penoscrotal Approach for Implantation of an Artificial Urinary Sphincter: Cuff Size and Control of Male Stress Urinary IncontinenceJournal of Urology, VOL. 182, NO. 5, (2404-2409), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2009.Henry G, Graham S, Cleves M, Simmons C and Flynn B (2018) Perineal Approach for Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation Appears to Control Male Stress Incontinence Better Than the Transscrotal ApproachJournal of Urology, VOL. 179, NO. 4, (1475-1479), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2008. Volume 177Issue 3March 2007Page: 1021-1025 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2007 by American Urological AssociationKeywordsstressurinary sphincterartificialbladder neck obstructionradiotherapyurinary incontinencebladderMetricsAuthor Information H. Henry Lai Scott Department of Urology, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas More articles by this author Elias I. Hsu Scott Department of Urology, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas More articles by this author Bin S. Teh Department of Radiology, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas Baylor College of Medicine and Department of Radiotherapy, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas More articles by this author E. Brian Butler Baylor College of Medicine and Department of Radiotherapy, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas More articles by this author Timothy B. Boone Scott Department of Urology, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas Baylor College of Medicine and Department of Radiotherapy, Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas Financial interest and/or other relationship with American Medical Systems. More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ...