Cargando…

Artificial urinary sphincter implantation: an important component of complex surgery for urinary tract reconstruction in patients with refractory urinary incontinence

BACKGROUND: We review our outcomes and experience of artificial urinary sphincter implantation for patients with refractory urinary incontinence from different causes. METHODS: Between April 2002 and May 2017, a total of 32 patients (median age, 40.8 years) with urinary incontinence had undergone ar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Fan, Liao, Limin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5759840/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29310634
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-018-0314-y
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: We review our outcomes and experience of artificial urinary sphincter implantation for patients with refractory urinary incontinence from different causes. METHODS: Between April 2002 and May 2017, a total of 32 patients (median age, 40.8 years) with urinary incontinence had undergone artificial urinary sphincter placement during urinary tract reconstruction. Eighteen patients (56.3%) were urethral injuries associated urinary incontinence, 9 (28.1%) had neurogenic urinary incontinence and 5 (15.6%) were post-prostatectomy incontinence. Necessary surgeries were conducted before artificial urinary sphincter placement as staged procedures, including urethral strictures incision, sphincterotomy, and augmentation cystoplasty. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 39 months. At the latest visit, 25 patients (78.1%) maintained the original artificial urinary sphincter. Four patients (12.5%) had artificial urinary sphincter revisions. Explantations were performed in three patients. Twenty-four patients were socially continent, leading to the overall success rate as 75%. The complication rate was 28.1%; including infections (n = 4), erosions (n = 4), and mechanical failure (n = 1). The impact of urinary incontinence on the quality of life measured by the visual analogue scale dropped from 7.0 ± 1.2 to 2.2 ± 1.5 (P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The primary sources for artificial urinary sphincter implantation in our center are unique, and the procedure is an effective treatment as a part of urinary tract reconstruction in complicated urinary incontinence cases with complex etiology.