Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

01-05-2019 | Original Article

Survival of the artificial urinary sphincter in a changing patient profile

Authors: M. J. te Dorsthorst, M. J. van der Doelen, F. Farag, F. M. J. Martens, J. P. F. A. Heesakkers

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 5/2019

Abstract

Purpose

To examine the functional survival of the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) AMS800 in a changing patient population. Because of increasing experience and dexterity of the operating team, we hypothesize that patients with known risk factors nowadays have a better survival of their prosthesis. However, due to a change to a more complex case mix, overall results appear to be worse.

Materials and methods

All men who underwent implantation of an AUS between 2001 and 2016 because of urethral sphincter deficiency were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided in groups based on date of surgery and number of patients: 2001–2009 (G1), 2010–2013 (G2), 2014–2016 (G3). Baseline characteristics and additional therapies prior to implantation were analyzed in all groups. Risk factors for failure only in G1 and G2. Revision or explantation of the AUS was used as endpoint. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to calculate survival of the device.

Results

A total of 129 patients (mean age 72 ± 9 years) underwent 129 primary implants, and 11 secondary implants. Median follow-up was 5.74 years in G1, 3.26 years G2 and 1.54 years G3. Approximately 25% of the patients in G1 had received adjuvant therapy for prostate cancer and 14% underwent previous surgery for incontinence. In G2, 51 and 55% underwent adjuvant therapy for prostate cancer and previous surgery for incontinence, respectively, G3 was comparable. The overall 50% survival improved in patients with radiotherapy and previous incontinence surgery in G2 as compared to G1.

Conclusions

Despite the more complex patient population, the survival of the AUS did not decrease. In some patient categories, the AUS functional survival is even still improving over the past few years.

Scott FB, Bradley WE, Timm GW (2002) Treatment of urinary incontinence by an implantable prosthetic urinary sphincter. 1974. J Urol 167:1125CrossRefPubMed

Hajivassilou CA (1999) A review of the complications and results of the implantation of the AMS artificial urinary sphincter. Eur Urol 35:36–44CrossRef

Van Bruwaene S, De Ridder D, van der Aa F (2015) The use of sling vs. sphincter in post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence. BJU Int 116:330–342CrossRefPubMed

Bauer RM, Gozzi C, Hubner W et al (2011) Contemporary management of postprostatectomy incontinence. Eur Urol 59:98596CrossRef

Farag F, van der Doelen M, van Breda J, D’Hauwers K, Heesakkers J (2016) Decline in artificial urinary sphincter survival in modern practice—do we treat a different patient? Neurourol Urodyn 9999:1–6

Buckley BS, Lapitan MCM, Epidemiology committee of the fourth International Consultation on Incontinence, Paris, 2008 (2010) Prevalence of urinary incontinence in men, women, and children—current evidence: findings of the fourth International Consultation on Incontinence. Urology 76(2):265–270CrossRefPubMed

Augustin H, Pummer K, Daghofer F, Habermann H, Primus G, Hubmer G (2002) Patient self-reporting questionnaire on urological morbidity and bother after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 42(2):112–117CrossRefPubMed

Burkhard FC, Kessler TM, Fleischmann A, Thalmann GN, Schumacher M, Studer UE (2006) Nerve sparing open radical retropubic prostatectomy–does it have an impact on urinary continence? J Urol 176(1):189–195CrossRefPubMed

Haab F, Yamaguchi R, Leach GE (1996) Postprostatectomy incontinence. Urol Clin North Am 23(3):447–457CrossRefPubMed

10.

Penson DF, Mc Lerran D, Feng Z, Li L, Albertsen PC, Gilliland FD, Hamilton A, Hoffman RM, Stephenson RA, Potosky AL, Stanford JL (2005) 5-year urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy: results from the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Urol 173(5):1701–1705CrossRefPubMed

11.

Sacco E, Prayer-Galetti T, Pinto F, Fracalanza S, Betto G, Pagano F, Artibani W (2006) Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: incidence by definition, risk factors and temporal trend in a large series with a long term follow-up. BJU Int 97(1234–124):1

12.

Veenema RJ, Gursel EO, Lattimer JK (1977) Radical retropubic prostatectomy for cancer: a 20-year experience. J Urol 117(3):330–331CrossRefPubMed

13.

Walsh PC, Jewett HJ (1980) Radical surgery for prostatic cancer. Cancer 45:1906–1911CrossRefPubMed

14.

Campbel SE, Glazener CMA, Hunter KF, Cody JD, Moore KN (2012) Conservative management for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD001843

15.

Chung E, Ranaweera M, Cartmill R (2012) Newer and novel artificial urinary sphincters (AUS): the development of alternatives to the current AUS device. BJU Int 110:5–11CrossRefPubMed

16.

James ND et al (2016) STAMPEDE investigators. Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial. Lancet 387(10024):1163–1177CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Shaikh MP, Alite F, WU MJ, Solanki AA, Harkenrider MM (2017) Adjuvant radiotherapy versus wait-and-see strategy for pathologic T3 or margin-positive prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Oncol 41(8):730–738CrossRef

18.

Mock S, Dmochowski RR, Brown ET, Reynolds WS, Kaufman MR, Milam DF (2015) The impact of urethral risk factors on transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter erosion rates and device survival. J Urol 194(6):1692–1696CrossRefPubMed

19.

Martins FE, Boyd SD (1995) Artificial urinary sphincter in patient following major pelvic surgery and/or radiotherapy: are they less favourable candidates? J Urol 153:1188CrossRefPubMed

20.

Manunta A, Guille F, Patard JJ et al (2000) Artificial sphincter insertion after radiotherapy: is it worthwhile? BJU Int 85:490CrossRefPubMed

21.

Gomha MA, Boone TB (2002) Artificial urinary sphincter in patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence in men who had prior radiotherapy; a risk and outcome analysis. J Urol 167:591–596CrossRefPubMed

22.

Jhavar S, Swanson G, Deb N, Littlejohn L, Pruszynski J, Machen G, Milburn P, Bird E (2017) Durability of artificial urinary sphincter with prior radiation therapy. Clin Genitourin Cancer 15(2):e175–e180CrossRefPubMed

23.

Guillaumier S, Solomon E, Jenks J, Pakzad M, Hamid R, Ockrim J, Greenwell T (2017) Radiotherapy is associated with reduced continence outcomes following implantation of the artificial urinary sphincter in men with post-radical prostatectomy incontinence. Urol Ann 9(3):253–256CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Ziegelmann MJ, Linder BJ, Rivera ME, Viers BR, Elliot DS (2016) The impact of prior urethral sling on artificial urinary sphincter outcomes. Can Urol Assoc J 10(11–12):405–409CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Hamid R. SATURN: prospective registry for patients undergoing surgery for male stress urinary incontinence in multiple European centres. EAU-RF 2016-01

Title: Survival of the artificial urinary sphincter in a changing patient profile
Authors: M. J. te Dorsthorst
M. J. van der Doelen
F. Farag
F. M. J. Martens
J. P. F. A. Heesakkers
Publication date: 01-05-2019
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 5/2019
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2448-7

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Survival of the artificial urinary sphincter in a changing patient profile

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2019

Efficacy of intra-arterial chemotherapy combined with intravesical chemotherapy in T1G3 bladder cancer when compared with intravesical chemotherapy alone after bladder-sparing surgery: a retrospective study

The importance of targeting intracrinology in prostate cancer management

Ureteral wall thickness as a significant factor in predicting spontaneous passage of ureteral stones of ≤ 10 mm: a preliminary report

Comparison of electrohydraulic and electromagnetic extracorporeal shock wave lithotriptors for upper urinary tract stones in a single center

Comparison between erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser therapy and sling procedures in the treatment of stress and mixed urinary incontinence

Limited sensitivity and size over measurements of ultrasound affect medical decisions for ureteral stone compared to non-contrasted computed tomography