Stemming the tide of mild to moderate post-prostatectomy incontinence: A retrospective comparison of transobturator male slings and the artificial urinary sphincter
- PMID: 25210552
- PMCID: PMC4137013
- DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.2108
Stemming the tide of mild to moderate post-prostatectomy incontinence: A retrospective comparison of transobturator male slings and the artificial urinary sphincter
Abstract
Introduction: The AUS remains the gold standard treatment for post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI), although most patients with mild-moderate PPI prefer a sling without strong evidence of procedural equivalence. This study compares outcomes of 2 procedures for the treatment of mild-moderate PPI.
Methods: A retrospective review of 124 patients (76 transobturator sling, 48 AUS) with mild-moderate PPI requiring intervention over an 8-year period. The primary outcome was continence. Secondary outcomes included global patient satisfaction, improvement, and complication rates. Mild to moderate incontinence was defined as requiring ≤5 pads/day.
Results: There was no significant difference in age (66.2 vs. 68.1 years; p = 0.17) or prostate cancer characteristics for slings and AUS, respectively. AUS patients had higher Charlson comorbidity scores and were more likely to have previous radiotherapy. Median length of follow up was 24 months for slings and 42 months for AUS. There was no difference in continence rates, 88.2% vs. 87.5% (p = 0.79), rate of improvement, 94.7% vs. 95.8% (p = 1.00), or patient satisfaction, 93.4% vs. 91.7% (p = 0.73), for slings and AUS, respectively. Complication rates were equivalent (19.7% vs. 16.7%; p = 1.00), though a significantly higher proportion of complications with AUS were Clavien Grade 3 (0% vs. 75%; p = 0.006).
Conclusions: For mild to moderate PPI there is no difference in continence, satisfaction, or improvement rates, between AUS and slings. AUS complications tend to be more severe. Our study supports the use of slings as first-line treatment for mild-moderate PPI.
Similar articles
-
Artificial Urinary Sphincter Is Better Than Slings for Moderate Male Stress Urinary Incontinence With Acceptable Complication Rate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Front Surg. 2022 Feb 9;9:841555. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.841555. eCollection 2022. Front Surg. 2022. PMID: 35223981 Free PMC article.
-
Artificial urinary sphincter significantly better than fixed sling for moderate post-prostatectomy stress urinary incontinence: a propensity score-matched study.BJU Int. 2021 Feb;127(2):229-237. doi: 10.1111/bju.15197. Epub 2020 Aug 26. BJU Int. 2021. PMID: 32744793
-
Outcomes of a Series of Patients with Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence Treated with an Adjustable Transobturator Male System or Artificial Urinary Sphincter.Adv Ther. 2021 Jan;38(1):678-690. doi: 10.1007/s12325-020-01563-z. Epub 2020 Nov 23. Adv Ther. 2021. PMID: 33230712 Free PMC article.
-
Prior male sling does not affect outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter.BJU Int. 2024 May;133(5):564-569. doi: 10.1111/bju.16282. Epub 2024 Jan 20. BJU Int. 2024. PMID: 38243854
-
Surgical management of post prostatectomy incontinence.Prostate Int. 2024 Jun;12(2):65-69. doi: 10.1016/j.prnil.2024.04.005. Epub 2024 Apr 27. Prostate Int. 2024. PMID: 39036757 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Male sling versus artificial urinary sphincter for the treatment of incontinence after prostate surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Transl Androl Urol. 2024 Aug 31;13(8):1416-1424. doi: 10.21037/tau-24-107. Epub 2024 Aug 23. Transl Androl Urol. 2024. PMID: 39280681 Free PMC article.
-
Artificial Urinary Sphincter Is Better Than Slings for Moderate Male Stress Urinary Incontinence With Acceptable Complication Rate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Front Surg. 2022 Feb 9;9:841555. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.841555. eCollection 2022. Front Surg. 2022. PMID: 35223981 Free PMC article.
-
SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF POST-PROSTATECTOMY INCONTINENCE.Eur Med J Urol. 2016 Apr;4(1):75-80. Eur Med J Urol. 2016. PMID: 32257247 Free PMC article.
-
Preoperative pad usage is independently associated with failure of non-adjustable male trans-obturator slings in otherwise well-selected patients.Can Urol Assoc J. 2019 Apr;13(4):120-124. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.5468. Epub 2018 Sep 27. Can Urol Assoc J. 2019. PMID: 30273118 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Wei J, Montie J. Comparison of patients’ and physicians’ rating of urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy. Semin Urol Oncol. 2000;18:76–80. - PubMed
-
- Scott F, Bradley W, Timm G. Treatment of urinary incontinence by an implantable prosthetic urinary sphincter. J Urol. 1974;112:75–80. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources