Cargando…

The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: With the general population aging and thus more patients developing bothersome erectile dysfunction, stress urinary incontinence and overactive bladder, there will likely be a higher demand for three common interactive implants in urology, the penile prosthesis, artificial...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bryk, Darren J., Zillioux, Jacqueline, Kennady, Emmett H., Sun, Fionna, Hasken, William, Ortiz, Nicolas M., Rapp, David E., Smith, Ryan P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10560334/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37814692
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-23-226
_version_ 1785117710247526400
author Bryk, Darren J.
Zillioux, Jacqueline
Kennady, Emmett H.
Sun, Fionna
Hasken, William
Ortiz, Nicolas M.
Rapp, David E.
Smith, Ryan P.
author_facet Bryk, Darren J.
Zillioux, Jacqueline
Kennady, Emmett H.
Sun, Fionna
Hasken, William
Ortiz, Nicolas M.
Rapp, David E.
Smith, Ryan P.
author_sort Bryk, Darren J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: With the general population aging and thus more patients developing bothersome erectile dysfunction, stress urinary incontinence and overactive bladder, there will likely be a higher demand for three common interactive implants in urology, the penile prosthesis, artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and sacral neuromodulation (SNM). Further, the prevalence of mild and major neurocognitive disorders (also known as mild cognitive impairment and dementia, respectively) is expected to increase. While the aforementioned urologic implants have excellent short and long term outcomes, there are also known device issues such as malfunction or misuse that may require surgical removal and/or revision. The objective of this narrative review is to describe the association of cognitive impairment and urologic implants. METHODS: We performed a search on PubMed between the years 1975–2023 for English language articles that reported on any type or severity of cognitive impairment and its association with penile prosthesis, AUS and/or SNM. While peer-reviewed published manuscripts were prioritized, abstracts that fit our search criteria were also included. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: Data assessing outcomes of patients with cognitive impairment who undergo placement of a urologic implant are limited. There is an association between AUS failure or misuse with cognitive impairment. SNM is efficacious in this population in the short term. In patients who develop dementia, an inflatable penile prosthesis can be deflated via in-office needle puncture and an AUS can be deactivated. The Memory Alteration Test, Quick Screen for Mild Cognitive Impairment and the Saint Louis University Mental Status Examination are relatively quick screening tests with good sensitivity and specificity for mild cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: While data on the association between urologic implants and cognitive impairment are sparse, there are tools that urologists can use to screen patients for cognitive impairment. With screening, urologists can provide appropriate preoperative counseling (including recommending against implantation) and can provide closer postoperative monitoring. Further study is required to assess which patients should be excluded from device implantation and how to properly assess for cognitive impairment in a manner that is both beneficial for the patient and convenient and efficient for a urologist.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10560334
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105603342023-10-09 The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review Bryk, Darren J. Zillioux, Jacqueline Kennady, Emmett H. Sun, Fionna Hasken, William Ortiz, Nicolas M. Rapp, David E. Smith, Ryan P. Transl Androl Urol Review Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: With the general population aging and thus more patients developing bothersome erectile dysfunction, stress urinary incontinence and overactive bladder, there will likely be a higher demand for three common interactive implants in urology, the penile prosthesis, artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and sacral neuromodulation (SNM). Further, the prevalence of mild and major neurocognitive disorders (also known as mild cognitive impairment and dementia, respectively) is expected to increase. While the aforementioned urologic implants have excellent short and long term outcomes, there are also known device issues such as malfunction or misuse that may require surgical removal and/or revision. The objective of this narrative review is to describe the association of cognitive impairment and urologic implants. METHODS: We performed a search on PubMed between the years 1975–2023 for English language articles that reported on any type or severity of cognitive impairment and its association with penile prosthesis, AUS and/or SNM. While peer-reviewed published manuscripts were prioritized, abstracts that fit our search criteria were also included. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: Data assessing outcomes of patients with cognitive impairment who undergo placement of a urologic implant are limited. There is an association between AUS failure or misuse with cognitive impairment. SNM is efficacious in this population in the short term. In patients who develop dementia, an inflatable penile prosthesis can be deflated via in-office needle puncture and an AUS can be deactivated. The Memory Alteration Test, Quick Screen for Mild Cognitive Impairment and the Saint Louis University Mental Status Examination are relatively quick screening tests with good sensitivity and specificity for mild cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: While data on the association between urologic implants and cognitive impairment are sparse, there are tools that urologists can use to screen patients for cognitive impairment. With screening, urologists can provide appropriate preoperative counseling (including recommending against implantation) and can provide closer postoperative monitoring. Further study is required to assess which patients should be excluded from device implantation and how to properly assess for cognitive impairment in a manner that is both beneficial for the patient and convenient and efficient for a urologist. AME Publishing Company 2023-09-05 2023-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10560334/ /pubmed/37814692 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-23-226 Text en 2023 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review Article
Bryk, Darren J.
Zillioux, Jacqueline
Kennady, Emmett H.
Sun, Fionna
Hasken, William
Ortiz, Nicolas M.
Rapp, David E.
Smith, Ryan P.
The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review
title The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review
title_full The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review
title_fullStr The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review
title_full_unstemmed The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review
title_short The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review
title_sort impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10560334/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37814692
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-23-226
work_keys_str_mv AT brykdarrenj theimpactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT zilliouxjacqueline theimpactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT kennadyemmetth theimpactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT sunfionna theimpactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT haskenwilliam theimpactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT ortiznicolasm theimpactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT rappdavide theimpactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT smithryanp theimpactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT brykdarrenj impactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT zilliouxjacqueline impactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT kennadyemmetth impactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT sunfionna impactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT haskenwilliam impactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT ortiznicolasm impactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT rappdavide impactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview
AT smithryanp impactofcognitiveimpairmentinurologicimplantsanarrativereview