Comparison of adjustable male slings and artificial urinary sphincter in the treatment of male urinary incontinence: a retrospective analysis of patient selection and postoperative continence status.

Autor: Grabbert, M., Hüsch, T., Kretschmer, A., Kirschner-Hermanns, R., Anding, R., Rose, A., Friedl, A., Obaje, A., Heidenreich, A., Brehmer, B., Naumann, C. M., Queissert, F., Loertzer, H., Pfitzenmaier, J., Nyarangi-Dix, J., Kurosch, M., Olianas, R., Homberg, R., Abdunnur, R., Schweiger, J.
Předmět:
Zdroj: World Journal of Urology; Jul2019, Vol. 37 Issue 7, p1415-1420, 6p
Abstrakt: Purpose: To analyze and compare preoperative patient characteristics and postoperative results in men with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) selected for an adjustable male sling system or an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in a large, contemporary, multi-institutional patient cohort. Methods: 658 male patients who underwent implantation between 2010 and 2012 in 13 participating institutions were included in this study (n = 176 adjustable male sling; n = 482 AUS). Preoperative patient characteristics and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. For statistical analysis, the independent T test and Mann–Whitney U test were used. Results: Patients undergoing adjustable male sling implantation were less likely to have a neurological disease (4.5% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.021), a history of urethral stricture (21.6% vs. 33.8%, p = 0.024) or a radiation therapy (22.7% vs. 29.9%, p = 0.020) compared to patients that underwent AUS implantation. Mean pad usage per day (6.87 vs. 5.82; p < 0.00) and the ratio of patients with a prior incontinence surgery were higher in patients selected for an AUS implantation (36.7% vs. 22.7%; p < 0.001). At maximum follow-up, patients that underwent an AUS implantation had a significantly lower mean pad usage during daytime (p < 0.001) and nighttime (p = 0.018). Furthermore, the patients' perception of their continence status was better with a subjective complete dry rate of 57.3% vs. 22.0% (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Patients selected for an AUS implantation showed a more complex prior history and pathogenesis of urinary incontinence as well as a more severe grade of SUI. Postoperative results reflect a better continence status after AUS implantation, favoring the AUS despite the more complicated patient cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze: Complementary Index
Externí odkaz: