Outcomes and Complication Rates of Cuff Downsizing in the Treatment of Worsening or Persistent Incontinence After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: This study investigated the functional outcomes and complication rates of cuff downsizing for the treatment of recurrent or persistent stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in men after the implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). Methods: Data from our institutional AUS database spanning the period from 2009 to 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The number of pads per day was determined, a standardized quality of life (QoL) questionnaire and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ) were administered, and postoperative complications according to the ClavienDindo classification were analyzed. Results: Out of 477 patients who received AUS implantation during the study period, 25 (5.2%) underwent cuff downsizing (median age, 77 years; interquartile range [IQR], 74–81 years; median follow-up, 4.4 years; IQR, 3–6.9 years). Before downsizing, SUI was very severe (ICIQ score 19–21) or severe (ICQ score 13–18) in 80% of patients, moderate (ICIQ score 6–12) in 12%, and slight (ICIQ score 1–5) in 8%. After downsizing, 52% showed an improvement of >5 out of 21 points. However, 28% still had very severe or severe SUI, 48% had moderate SUI, and 20% had slight SUI. One patient no longer had SUI. In 52% of patients, the use of pads per day was reduced by ≥50%. QoL improved by >2 out of 6 points in 56% of patients. Complications (infections/urethral erosions) requiring device explantation occurred in 36% of patients, with a median time to event of 14.5 months. Conclusions: Although cuff downsizing carries a risk of AUS explantation, it can be a valuable treatment option for selected patients with persistent or recurrent SUI after AUS implantation. Over half of patients experienced improvements in symptoms, satisfaction, ICIQ scores, and pad use. It is important to inform patients about the potential risks and benefits of AUS to manage their expectations and assess individual risks.
Abstract
Purpose: This study investigated the functional outcomes and complication rates of cuff downsizing for the treatment of recurrent or persistent stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in men after the implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). Methods: Data from our institutional AUS database spanning the period from 2009 to 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The number of pads per day was determined, a standardized quality of life (QoL) questionnaire and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ) were administered, and postoperative complications according to the ClavienDindo classification were analyzed. Results: Out of 477 patients who received AUS implantation during the study period, 25 (5.2%) underwent cuff downsizing (median age, 77 years; interquartile range [IQR], 74–81 years; median follow-up, 4.4 years; IQR, 3–6.9 years). Before downsizing, SUI was very severe (ICIQ score 19–21) or severe (ICQ score 13–18) in 80% of patients, moderate (ICIQ score 6–12) in 12%, and slight (ICIQ score 1–5) in 8%. After downsizing, 52% showed an improvement of >5 out of 21 points. However, 28% still had very severe or severe SUI, 48% had moderate SUI, and 20% had slight SUI. One patient no longer had SUI. In 52% of patients, the use of pads per day was reduced by ≥50%. QoL improved by >2 out of 6 points in 56% of patients. Complications (infections/urethral erosions) requiring device explantation occurred in 36% of patients, with a median time to event of 14.5 months. Conclusions: Although cuff downsizing carries a risk of AUS explantation, it can be a valuable treatment option for selected patients with persistent or recurrent SUI after AUS implantation. Over half of patients experienced improvements in symptoms, satisfaction, ICIQ scores, and pad use. It is important to inform patients about the potential risks and benefits of AUS to manage their expectations and assess individual risks.
참고문헌 (22)
- Thüroff JW, "EAU guidelines on urinary incontinence", Eur Urol, 59, pp.387~400 (2011)
- Van der Aa F, "The artificial urinary sphincter after a quarter of a century : a critical systematic review of its use in male non-neurogenic incontinence", Eur Urol, 63, pp.681~689 (2013)
- Linder BJ, "Long-term outcomes following artificial urinary sphincter placement : an analysis of 1082 cases at Mayo Clinic", Urology, 86, pp.602~607 (2015)
- Lai HH, "13 years of experience with artificial urinary sphincter implantation at Baylor College of Medicine", J Urol, 177, pp.1021~1025 (2007)
- Martins FE, "Artificial urinary sphincter in patients following major pelvic surgery and", or radiotherapy : are they less favorable candidates?, 1995, pp.153, 1188~1193
- Webster GD, "Management of male incontinence following artificial urinary sphincter failure", Curr Opin Urol, 15, pp.386~390 (2005)
- Saffarian A, "Urethral atrophy after artificial urinary sphincter placement : is cuff downsizing effective?", J Urol, 169, pp.567~569 (2003)
- DiMarco DS, "Tandem cuff artificial urinary sphincter as a salvage procedure following failed primary sphincter placement for the treatment of post-prostatectomy incontinence", J Urol, 170(4 Pt 1), pp.1252~1254 (2003)
- Guralnick ML, "Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter cuff placement in cases requiring revision for erosion and urethral atrophy", J Urol, 167, pp.2075~2078 (2002)
- Linder BJ, "Artificial urinary sphincter revision for urethral atrophy : comparing single cuff downsizing and tandem cuff placement", Int Braz J Urol, 43, pp.264~270 (2017)
- Klovning A, "Comparison of two questionnaires for assessing the severity of urinary incontinence : the ICIQ-UI SF versus the incontinence severity index", Neurourol Urodyn, 28, pp.411~415 (2009)
- Bugeja S, "Urethral atrophy after implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter : fact or fiction?", BJU Int, 117, pp.669~676 (2016)
- Brant WO, "Risk factors for erosion of artificial urinary sphincters : a multicenter prospective study", Urology, 84, pp.934~938 (2014)
- Wiedemann L, "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, pp.1163~1168 (2013)
- Couillard DR, "Proximal artificial sphincter cuff repositioning for urethral atrophy incontinence", Urology, 45, pp.653~656 (1995)
- Moses RA, "Efficacy of pressure regulating balloon exchange in men with post artificial urinary sphincter persistent or recurrent stress urinary incontinence", Urology, 123, pp.252~257 (2019)
- Maximilien B, "Urethral pressure controlled balloon refilling or balloon change for artificial sphincter secondary procedure?", Prog Urol, 28, pp.209~214 (2018)
- Fabian Queissert, "Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff Size Predicts Outcome in Male Patients Treated for Stress Incontinence: Results of a Large Central European Multicenter Cohort Study", International Neurourology Journal, 23(3), pp.219~225 (2019), 대한배뇨장애요실금학회[DOI]
- Krughoff K, "Artificial urinary sphincter cuff downsizing improves continence and patient satisfaction in cases of sub-cuff atrophy", J Urol, 209, pp.742~751 (2023)
- Lai HH, "Complex artificial urinary sphincter revision and reimplantation cases--how do they fare compared to virgin cases?", J Urol, 187, pp.951~955 (2012)
- Maurer V, "Functional outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter implantation with distal bulbar double cuff in men with and without a history of external beam radiotherapy : an analysis of a prospective database", BJU Int, 124, pp.1040~1046 (2019)
- Wang R, "Long-term outcomes after primary failures of artificial urinary sphincter implantation", Urology, 79, pp.922~928 (2012)