First safety outcomes for rigicon conticlassic® artificial urinary sphincter.
Journal
International journal of impotence research
ISSN: 1476-5489
Titre abrégé: Int J Impot Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9007383
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Aug 2023
05 Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
24
05
2023
accepted:
25
07
2023
revised:
14
07
2023
medline:
6
8
2023
pubmed:
6
8
2023
entrez:
5
8
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The Rigicon ContiClassic® is a new sphincteric device designed to treat male stress urinary incontinence. This study evaluates the surgical outcomes and safety profile of the first 116 patients who received the implant between September 2021 and April 2022. Data were collected from patient information forms completed at the time of the implant and submitted by implanting surgeons, nursing staff in the Operating Room or company representatives present during the surgery. The study analyzed patient demographics, surgical details, and etiology of incontinence. The mean age of patients was 68.3 years +/- 9.65 yrs. Minimum age was 23 and maximum age was 83. The most common reason for implantation was urinary incontinence (58.6%) after radical prostatectomy. The results showed a revision rate of 6.90%, with three cases of fluid loss, four cases of iatrogenic mistaken sizing, and one case of patient dissatisfaction. There were no reported infections. Kaplan-Meier calculation showed survival rate of 93.2% at 12 months. This study shows the early safety outcomes for the Rigicon ContiClassic® sphincter device to be comparable to others presently on the market.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37543658
doi: 10.1038/s41443-023-00748-8
pii: 10.1038/s41443-023-00748-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Sandhu JS, Breyer B, Comiter C, Eastham JA, Gomez C, Kirages DJ, et al. Incontinence after prostate treatment: AUA/SUFU guideline. J Urol. 2019;202:369–78.
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000314
pubmed: 31059663
Wright JL, Nathens AB, Rivara FP, Mackenzie EJ, Wessells H. Specific fracture configurations predict sexual and excretory dysfunction in men and women 1 year after pelvic fracture. J Urol. 2006;176:1540–5.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.06.044
pubmed: 16952678
Koch GE, Kaufman MR. Male stress urinary incontinence. Urol Clin North Am. 2022;49:403–18.
doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2022.04.005
pubmed: 35931433
Pizzol D, Demurtas J, Celotto S, Maggi S, Smith L, Angiolelli G, et al. Urinary incontinence and quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2022;33:25–35.
doi: 10.1007/s40520-020-01712-y
Chung E. Contemporary surgical devices for male stress urinary incontinence: a review of technological advances in current continence surgery. Trans Androl Urol. 2017;6:S112–21.
doi: 10.21037/tau.2017.04.12
Fuller TW, Ballon-Landa E, Gallo K, Smith TG 3rd, Ajay D, Westney OL, et al. Outcomes and Risk Factors of Revision and Replacement Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation in Radiated and Nonradiated Cases. J Urol. 2020;204:110–14.
Wilson SK, Westney OL, Mulcahy JJ. Twenty years later: is the scrotal one-incision AUS of value? Int J Impot Res. 2022;34:243–51.
doi: 10.1038/s41443-020-0317-6
pubmed: 32488211
Terlecki RP, Wilson SK. A new paradigm for surgical revision of the artificial urinary sphincter for recurrent stress urinary incontinence. Int J Impot Res. 2022;34:37–43.
doi: 10.1038/s41443-020-0307-8
pubmed: 32444833
Wilson S, Delk J 2nd, Henry GD, Siegel AL. New surgical technique for sphincter urinary control system using upper transverse scrotal incision. J Urol. 2003;169:261–64.
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64082-7
pubmed: 12478150
Abrams P, Constable LD, Cooper D, MacLennan G, Drake MJ, Harding C, et al. Outcomes of a noninferiority randomized controlled trial of surgery for men with urodynamic stress incontinence after prostate surgery (MASTER). Eur Urol. 2021;79:812–23.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.01.024
pubmed: 33551297
pmcid: 8175331
Yoon PD, Chalasani V, Woo HH. Use of Clavien-Dindo classification in reporting and grading complications after urological surgical procedures: analysis of 2010-2012. J Urol. 2013;190:1271–4.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.025
pubmed: 23583859
Scott FB, Bradley WE, Timm GW. Treatment of urinary incontinence by implantable prosthetic sphincter. Urology. 1973;1:252–59.
doi: 10.1016/0090-4295(73)90749-8
pubmed: 4802066
Wilson SK, Wen L, Rossello M, Maria P, Carrion R, Perito P, et al. Initial safety outcomes for the Rigicon Infla10® inflatable penile prosthesis. published online ahead of print, 2023 BJU Int. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15960 .
Carson CC, Mulcahy JJ, Govier FE. Efficacy, safety and patient satisfaction outcomes of the AMS 700CX inflatable penile prosthesis: results of a long-term multicenter study. AMS 700CX Study Group. J Urol. 2000;164:376–80.
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67364-8
pubmed: 10893589
Goldstein I, Newman L, Baum N, Brooks M, Chaikin L, Goldberg K, et al. Safety and efficacy outcome of mentor alpha-1 inflatable penile prosthesis implantation for impotence treatment. J Urol. 1997;157:833–39.
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65058-4
pubmed: 9072580
Queissert F, Huesch T, Kretschmer A, Anding R, Kurosch M, Kirschner-Hermanns R, et al. Artificial urinary sphincter cuff size predicts outcome in male patients treated for stress incontinence: results of a large central european multicenter cohort study. Int Neurourol J 2019;23:219–25.
doi: 10.5213/inj.1938032.016
pubmed: 31607101
pmcid: 6790824
Gundian JC, Barrett DM, Parulkar BG. Mayo Clinic experience with use of the AMS800 artificial urinary sphincter for urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 1989;142:1459–61.
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)39126-7
pubmed: 2585618
Linder BJ, Rivera ME, Ziegelmann MJ, Elliott DS. Long-term outcomes following artificial urinary sphincter placement: an analysis of 1082 cases at Mayo Clinic. Urology. 2015;86:602–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.05.029
pubmed: 26135815
Ostrowsky I, Ciechan J, Sledz E, Wojciech D, Tomasz G, Chlosta P. Four-year follow-up on a Zephyr Surgical Implants 375 artificial urinary sphincter for male incontinence from one urological center. Cent Eur J Urol. 2018;71:320–25.
Giammo A, Falcone M, Blecher G, Ammirati E, Geretto P, Manassero A, et al. A novel artificial urinary sphincter (VICTO®) for the management of postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: description of the surgical technique and preliminary results from a multicenter series. Urol Int. 2021;105:414–20.
doi: 10.1159/000512722
pubmed: 33611317
Van der Aa F, Drake MJ, Kasyan GR, Petrolekas A, Cornu JN. The artificial urinary sphincter after a quarter of a century: a critical systematic review of its use in male non-neurogenic incontinence. Eur Urol. 2013;63:681–89.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.11.034
pubmed: 23219375