THE ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTER FOR THE TREATMENT OF URINARY INCONTINENCE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59277/RRST-EE.2025.2.21Keywords:
Artificial urinary sphincter, Intrinsic sphincteric deficiency, Urinary incontinence, Post prostatectomy incontinenceAbstract
The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) imposed itself as the most effective treatment for urinary incontinence after surgery of the prostate. Along with the technological development and improvement of the device over time, more indications have emerged, most of which are not yet considered mainstream but provide an alternative in the armamentarium of the modern urologist. The artificial urinary sphincter was first introduced in 1974 and has undergone significant evolution since then, with several manufacturers currently active in this market. This treatment is effective and safe, although some potential complications may still occur and need to be understood and accepted by the patient. Considering that there is no other therapeutic option comparable in terms of efficacy, the artificial urinary sphincter deserves its place as the gold standard treatment for post-prostatectomy incontinence in males. We conclude that the AUS brought significant improvement in the health-related quality of life for most men with incontinence after prostatic surgery; however, there is still a need for further development of the device, as the complication rate remains high, despite a noticeable improvement over the decades.
References
(1) H.H. Lai, T.B. Boone, Implantation of artificial urinary sphincter in patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence, preoperative overactive bladder and mixed symptoms, J Urol., 185, 6, pp. 2254–2259 (2011).
(2) D.D. Thiel, P.R. Young, G.A. Broderick, M.G. Heckman, M.J. Wehle, T.C. Igel, S.P. Petrou, Do clinical or urodynamic parameters predict artificial urinary sphincter outcome in post-radical prostatectomy incontinence?, Urology, 69, 2, pp. 315–319 (2007).
(3) F. Trigo Rocha, C.M. Gomes, A.I. Mitre, S. Arap, M. Srougi, A prospective study evaluating the efficacy of the artificial sphincter AMS 800 for the treatment of postradical prostatectomy urinary incontinence and the correlation between preoperative urodynamic and surgical outcomes, Urology, 71, 1, pp. 85–89 (2008).
(4) R. Lee, A.E. Te, S.A. Kaplan, J.S. Sandhu, Temporal trends in adoption of and indications for the artificial urinary sphincter, J. Urol., 181, 6, pp. 2622–2627 (2009).
(5) T. Hüsch, A. Kretschmer, F. Thomsen, D. Kronlachner, M. Kurosch, Antibiotic coating of the artificial urinary sphincter (AMS 800): is it worthwhile?, Urology, 103, pp. 179–84 (2017).
(6) M.R. de Cógáin, D.S. Elliott, The impact of an antibiotic coating on the artificial urinary sphincter infection rate, J Urol., 190, 1, pp. 113–117 (2013).
(7) ***Rigicon, Artificial Urinary Sphincter-ContiReflex (2023).
(8) N.J. Sathianathen, S.M. McGuigan, D.A. Moon, Outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter implantation in the irradiated patient, BJU Int., 113, 4, pp. 636-641 (2014).
(9) H.H. Lai, E.I. Hsu, B.S. Teh, E.B. Butler, T.B. Boone, 13 Years experience with artificial urinary sphincter implantation at Baylor College of Medicine, J. Urol., 177, pp. 1021–1025 (2007).
(10) ***Best Practice Policy Statement on Urologic Surgery Antimicrobial Prophylaxis (2008).
(11) ***Urologic Procedures and Antimicrobial Prophylaxis (2019).
(12) J.S. Magera, B.A. Inman, D.S. Elliott, Does preoperative topical antimicrobial scrub reduce positive surgical site culture rates in men undergoing artificial urinary sphincter placement?, J Urol., 178, pp. 1328–1332 (2007).
(13) H.L. Ratan, D.J. Summerton, S.K. Wilson, T.R. Terry, Development and current status of the AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter, EAU-EBU Update Ser, 4, pp. 117–128 (2006).
(14) S.K. Wilson, P.J. Aliotta, E.A. Salem, J.J. Mulcahy, New enhancements of the scrotal one-incision technique for placement of artificial urinary sphincter allow proximal cuff placement, J Sex Med., 7, 10, pp. 3510–3515 (2010).
(15) C. Jamaer, H. De Bruyn, A. Van Renterghem, E. Baten, K. Van Renterghem, Penoscrotal Incision for the Primary Implantation of an Artificial Urinary Sphincter, Curr Urol., 14, pp. 74-78 (2020).
(16) A. Kretschmer, T. Huesch, F. Thomsen, D. Kronlachner, A. Obaje, R. Anding, T. Pottek, A. Rose, R. Olianas, A. Friedl, W. Hübner, R. Homberg, J. Pfitzenmaier, U. Grein, F. Queissert, C. Naumann, J. Schweiger, C. Wotzka, J. Nyarangi-Dix, R. Bauer, Complications and short-term explantation rate following artificial urinary sphincter implantation: results from a large middle European multi-institutional case series, Urologia internationalis, 97 (2016).
(17) D.W. Bratzler, P.M. Houck, Antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgery: an advisory statement from the National Surgical Infection Prevention Project, Clin Infect Dis., 38, 12, pp. 1706–1715 (2004).
(18) C.A. Seideman, L.C. Zhao, S.J. Hudak, J. Mierzwiak, M. Adibi, A.F. Morey, Is prolonged catheterization a risk factor for artificial urinary sphincter cuff erosion?, Urology, 82, 4, pp. 943–946 (2013).
(19) P. Léon, E. Chartier-Kastler, M. Rouprêt, V. Ambrogi, P. Mozer, V. Phé, Long-term functional outcomes after artificial urinary sphincter implantation in men with stress urinary incontinence, BJU Int., 115, 6, pp. 951–957 (2015).
(20) V. Cauni, I. Ciofu, M. Dragutescu, B. Mihai, C. Persu, Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate – the modern approach, Rev. Roum. Sci. Techn. – Électrotechn. et Énerg., 66, 1, pp. 59–62 (2021).
(21) Y.S. Suh, K.J. Ko, T.H. Kim, H.H. Sung, K.S. Lee, Long-term outcomes of primary implantation and revisions of artificial urinary sphincter in men with stress urinary incontinence, Neurourol Urodyn., 36, 7, pp. 1930–1937 (2017).
(22) H. Serag, S. Bang, Y.Z. Almallah, Artificial urinary sphincters for treating postprostatectomy incontinence: A contemporary experience from the UK, Res Rep Urol., 10, pp. 63-68 (2018).
(23) I. Ciofu, I. Ceausu, N.M. Chirca, C. Persu, Solifenacin treatment after intradetrusor injections with botulinum toxin in patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity, American Journal of Therapeutics, 29, 5, pp. e507–e511 (2022).
(24) D.K. Montague, Artificial Urinary Sphincter: Long-Term Results and Patient Satisfaction (2012).
(25) A. Kretschmer, T. Huesch, F. Thomsen, D. Kronlachner, A. Obaje, R. Anding, T. Pottek, A. Rose, R. Olianas, A. Friedl, W. Hübner, R. Homberg, J. Pfitzenmaier, U. Grein, F. Queissert, C. Naumann, J. Schweiger, C. Wotzka, J. Nyarangi-Dix, R. Bauer, Complications and short-term explantation rate following artificial urinary sphincter implantation: results from a large middle European multi-institutional case series, Urologia internationalis, 97 (2016).
(26) R.C. O’Connor, M.B. Lyon, M.L. Guralnick, G.T. Bales, Long-term follow-up of single versus double cuff artificial urinary sphincter insertion for the treatment of severe postprostatectomy stress urinary incontinence, Urology, 71, pp. 90–93 (2008).
(27) M.L. Guralnick, E. Miller, K.L. Toh, G.D. Webster, Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter cuff placement in cases requiring revision for erosion and urethral atrophy, J Urol., 167, pp. 2075–2078 (2002).
(28) L. Wiedemann, J.N. Cornu, E. Haab, L. Peyrat, S. Beley, X. Cathelineau, F. Haab, Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter implantation as a salvage surgical procedure for challenging cases of male stress urinary incontinence: surgical technique and functional outcomes in a contemporary series, BJU Int., 112, 8, pp. 1163–1168 (2013).
(29) H.H. Lai, T.B. Boone, Complex artificial urinary sphincter revision and reimplantation cases--how do they fare compared to virgin cases?, J Urol., 187, 3, pp. 951–955 (2012).
(30) B.J. Linder, M. de Cogain, D.S. Elliott, Long-term device outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter reimplantation following prior explantation for erosion or infection, J Urol., 191, 3, pp. 734–738 (2014).
(31) G.V. Raj, A.C. Peterson, K.L. Toh, G.D. Webster, Outcomes following revisions and secondary implantation of the artificial urinary sphincter, J Urol., 173, 4, pp. 1242–1245 (2005).
(32) S.B. Radomski, V. Ruzhynsky, C.J.D. Wallis, S. Herschorn, Complications and interventions in patients with an artificial urinary sphincter: long-term results, The Journal of Urology, 200, 5, pp. 1093–1098 (2018)
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 REVUE ROUMAINE DES SCIENCES TECHNIQUES — SÉRIE ÉLECTROTECHNIQUE ET ÉNERGÉTIQUE
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
