Prevalence and Risk Factors of Artificial Urinary Sphincter Revision in Nonneurological Male Patients.
Aged
Device Removal
/ statistics & numerical data
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Prevalence
Prosthesis Failure
Prosthesis Implantation
/ adverse effects
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
/ statistics & numerical data
Risk Factors
Urinary Incontinence
/ etiology
Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
/ adverse effects
lower urinary tract symptoms
reoperation
urinary incontinence, stress
urinary sphincter, artificial
urodynamics
Journal
The Journal of urology
ISSN: 1527-3792
Titre abrégé: J Urol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376374
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
30
6
2021
medline:
28
10
2021
entrez:
29
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The main objective of this study was to assess the prevalence and risk factors of male artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) mechanical failures and nonmechanical failures. The charts of all male patients who underwent AUS implantation between 2004 and 2020 in 16 centers were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with neurogenic stress urinary incontinence (SUI) were excluded as well as revisions/explantations due to infections and/or erosions. The causes of revision were divided into mechanical failures (fluid loss or malfunction from any components of the AUS), nonmechanical failures (urethral atrophy, recurrence/persistence of SUI despite normally functioning device) and other (pump malposition, balloon herniation, hematoma, pain). Failure-free survival analysis was performed both for general and specific causes of revision. Predictors of mechanical and nonmechanical failures were determined by Cox proportional hazards model. A total of 1,020 patients met the inclusion criteria. After a median followup of 20 months, the estimated 5-year and 10-year overall revision-free survival was 60% and 40%, respectively. There were 214 AUS revisions: 59 (27.6%) for mechanical failures, 121 (56.5%) for nonmechanical failures and 34 (15.9%) other causes of revision. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, larger cuff size was the only predictor of overall revisions (HR=1.04 [1.01-1.07]; p=0.01) and revision for nonmechanical failure (HR=1.05 [1.02-1.09]; p=0.004). Half of the male AUS patients underwent device revision within the first 10 years after implantation. Nonmechanical failures are the primary cause of AUS revision in nonneurological men. Larger cuff size appears to be the main determinant of AUS revision risk.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34184925
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001954
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1248-1257Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn