The current role of the artificial urinary sphincter for the treatment of urinary incontinence

PURPOSE: The introduction of the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in 1972 was heralded as a revolution for the treatment of genuine stress incontinence. Initial enthusiasm was tempered by disappointment as complications occurred. The device has now been in routine clinical use for more than 30 years, and the indications and surgical principles involved in its use along with short-term and long-term outcomes are more clearly defined. Hence, we reviewed the literature to clarify the role of the AUS and offer a possible solution to its problems in the guise of a new sphincter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A MEDLINE search was performed and all articles relating to the role of the AUS for the treatment of urinary incontinence were reviewed. RESULTS: The AMS 800 (American Medical Systems, Minnetonka, Minnesota) provides urinary continence in 73% of cases (range 61% to 96%) and it has a complication rate of 12% (range 3% to 33%) for mechanical failure, 4.5% to 67% for early infection/erosion, 15% for late erosion and 7% for delayed recurrent incontinence. The literature supports the role of the AUS as an important and reliable treatment modality for stress urinary incontinence and intrinsic sphincter deficiency. However, it is not suitable in all patients and its use for the management of hypermobility is controversial. Hence, careful patient selection according to indication is required with full preoperative counseling. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its reliability for achieving urinary continence the AMS 800 is not perfect. Newer devices, such as that being developed at our institution, may offer improved outcomes and decreased complication rates.     

The outcome of artificial urinary sphincter placement after a mean 15-year follow-up in a paediatric population.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term outcome in children who had an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placed, after a minimum of 10 years of follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records of patients who had an AUS placed at the Children's Hospital of Michigan were reviewed and a telephone questionnaire was then completed by all patients with an AUS currently in place. RESULTS: Forty-seven children initially had an AUS placed between October 1978 and August 1986; medical records and follow-up were available for 32. After a mean follow-up of 15.4 years, 13 patients had had the AUS removed and 19 currently have an intact AUS. Erosion or infection was responsible for all AUS removals. Possible risk factors for AUS removal were prior AUS erosion, prior bladder neck surgery and a balloon pressure of >70 cmH2O. Eighteen of 19 patients with an intact AUS are dry and seven void volitionally. Revision was the most common reason for additional surgery, but the revision rate has decreased with the most current AS-800 model, to 0.03 revisions per patient-year. Of the 13 patients with an AS-800 model placed after 1987, nine have not required revision. Upper tract changes were mild and uncommon. CONCLUSION: The AUS is a durable and effective surgical option in the management of neurogenic urinary incontinence, and is the only reliable technique that can preserve volitional voiding. With technical improvements to the AUS and a longer follow-up, the revision rate has decreased. Causes of AUS removal may be preventable with improvements in surgical technique and patient selection. AUS placement should be considered as a first choice for the surgical management of neurogenic sphincteric incompetence.     

医源性男性尿失禁的手术治疗

前列腺外科手术、冷冻消融术、放射治疗以及尿道重建手术可导致医源性男性尿失禁(IMI),其中前列腺癌根治术是最常见的原因.IMI保守治疗方法有凯格尔训练和盆底肌肉电刺激等,而手术是有效的治疗方式,包括人工括约肌(AUS)植入术、球海绵体悬吊术、经尿道注射填充剂等.这些方法都是通过增加尿道阻力来达到治疗目的.AUS植入术被...     

Management of end-stage erectile dysfunction and stress urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy by simultaneous dual implantation using a single trans-scrotal incision: surgical technique and outcomes

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and end-stage erectile dysfunction (ED) after radical prostatectomy (RP) can decrease a patient''s quality of life (QoL). We describe a surgical technique involving scrotal incision for simultaneous dual implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Patients with moderate to severe SUI (>3 pads per day) and end-stage ED following RP were selected for dual implantation. An upper transverse scrotal incision was made, followed by bulbar urethra dissection and AUS cuff placement. Through the same incision, the corpora cavernosa was exposed, and an IPP positioned. Followed by extraperitoneal reservoirs placement and pumps introduced in the scrotum. Short-term, intra- and post-operative complications; continence status and erectile function; and patient satisfaction and QoL were recorded. A total of 32 patients underwent dual implantation. Early AUS-related complications were: AUS reservoir migration and urethral erosion. One case of distal corporal extrusion occurred. No prosthetic infection was reported. Over 96% of patients were socially the continent (≤1 pad per day) and > 95% had sufficient erections for intercourse. Limitations of the study were the small number of patients, the lack of the control group using a perineal approach for AUS placement and only a 12 months follow-up. IPP and AUS dual implantation using a single scrotal incision technique is a safe and effective option in patients with SUI and ED after RP. Further studies on larger numbers of patients are warranted.     

Tulane experience with management of urinary incontinence after placement of an artificial urinary sphincter

Summary Persistent urinary incontinence following placement of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) presents a challenging diagnostic problem. This report reviews 30 cases (27 males and 3 females) involving urinary incontinence following AUS placement. The mean age of the patients was 64.4 years (range, 10–79 years). Physical examination demonstrated evidence or suspicion of infection or erosion in 7 patients, and subsequent cystoscopic examination revealed erosion caused by the cuff in 6 of these 7 cases. The remaining 23 patients were evaluated by videofluorourodynamics (VFUD) to ascertain the cause of incontinence. VFUD demonstrated detrusor instability in 9 patients (39%), low detrusor compliance in 3 patients (13%), and poor detrusor contractility in 1 patient (4.4%). Bladder-outlet obstruction was diagnosed in 2 patients (8.8%) — 1 with bladder-neck contracture and 1 with ureteral stricture. Altogether, 2 (8.8%) cases of tissue atrophy were diagnosed with low urethral closing pressure at the cuff. In all, 1 patient (4.4%) was diagnosed as having a vesicovaginal fistula, 1 (4.4%) had a tubing kink, and 4 (17%) had leaking devices diagnosed during VFUD by cycling of the device. Of the 23 patients, 21 (91%) demonstrably improved or became fully continent after appropriate treatment had been initiated. A review of this study suggests that the majority of incontinent patients after AUS implantation can be managed successfully, provided that a systematic diagnostic approach is followed and appropriate treatment is initiated.     

Improved artificial urinary sphincter outcomes using a transcorporal cuff placement in patients with a “fragile urethra”

IntroductionThe artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the most effective treatment option for incontinence after prostate cancer treatment. However, patients with a “fragile urethra” (defined as prior radiotherapy, previous failed AUS, or previous urethroplasty) are at increased risk of AUS failure. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes using standard and transcorporal cuff placement in this group of patients.MethodsA retrospective review was performed on patients with a fragile urethra who underwent AUS insertion between 2004 and 2017. The primary outcome was the need for AUS revision. Secondary outcome measures included change in pad use, patient satisfaction, continence (≤1 pad/day), improvement (≥50% change in pad use), and cuff erosion rates.ResultsSeventy-six patients met the criteria for inclusion, with a mean age of 71.6 years and a mean followup of 37.9 months. A total of 42.1% had prior radiotherapy, 56.6% had a history of failed AUS, and 19.7% had previous urethroplasty. Transcorporal cuff placement was performed in 31.6% (n=24). These patients had lower revision (20.8% vs. 36.5%; p=0.05) and erosion rates (8.3% vs. 17.3%; p=0.09). There was no significant difference in functional outcomes such as continence (66.7% vs. 73.1%; p=0.57), improvement (100% vs. 90.4%;p=0.17), or satisfaction (82.6% vs. 69.4%; p=0.26), nor for 90-day complications (4.2% vs. 9.6%; p=0.41).ConclusionsAUS insertion is an effective treatment option for post-prostatectomy incontinence in the setting of a fragile urethra. Transcorporal cuff placement in this subset of patients may be recommended, as it is associated with lower revision and erosion rates compared to standard cuff placement.     

Surgery Insight: surgical management of postprostatectomy incontinence--the artificial urinary sphincter and male sling

Stress urinary incontinence in men is usually a result of intrinsic sphincter deficiency following prostate cancer surgery. Active conservative management with fluid restriction, medication management and pelvic floor exercises is indicated for the first 12 months. If bothersome incontinence persists, urodynamic evaluation is indicated in order to assess detrusor storage function, contractility and sphincteric integrity. Standard surgical options include urethral bulking agents, artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and male sling. Periurethral injection of bulking agents is satisfactory in only a minority of patients, leaving AUS and male sling as the most common surgical treatments. In patients with severe urinary incontinence, AUS seems to have a higher rate of success than the male sling. Furthermore, AUS is indicated in men with detrusor hypocontractility as adequate detrusor contractility is needed to overcome the fixed resistance of the sling. In patients with milder levels of stress incontinence, the two techniques have approximately equal efficacy in the short-to-intermediate term. While current reports of the male sling are generally limited to 1-4 years' follow-up, the infection, erosion, and revision rate for the male sling seem somewhat lower than that for the AUS in appropriately chosen patients.     

Current use of the artificial urinary sphincter and its long-term durability: A nationwide survey in Japan

Objectives:   Although the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is one of the most effective surgical treatments for severe urinary incontinence, little is known about its use in Japan. A nationwide survey was done to determine contemporary trends in AUS use and its long-term durability.
Methods:   Data on AUS units sold in Japan were provided directly by Takai Hospital Supply Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan, and a survey form was sent to all 44 institutes where AUS implantation had been carried out. The survey included various demographic and preoperative variables, surgical variables, and postoperative outcomes.
Results:   Between 1994 and 2007, a total of 100 AUS devices had been provided in Japan. Of the 44 institutes, 24 responded to the survey, and a total of 64 patients were enrolled in the study. Post-urological surgery incontinence accounted for 81.3% of the indications. During the mean follow-up of 50 months, mechanical failure occurred in four (6.2%), and the device was removed in 13 (20.3%) due to infection (14.0%), erosion (4.7%), or urination difficulty (1.5%). Of the 58 patients evaluated, 91.4% reported social continence. Five- and 10-year failure-free rates were 74.8% and 70.1%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, operative time was an independent predictor of treatment failure ( P  = 0.0334).
Conclusions:   Considering recent trends in prostate surgery, the AUS may be significantly underused in Japan. Although excellent long-term durability has been achieved, a learning effect appears to be evident. The Japanese urological community needs to provide appropriate patients with this treatment option.     

Artificial urinary sphincter: 11-year experience in adolescents with congenital neuropathic bladder

OBJECTIVE: We assess our experience over the last 11 years in the use of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) to treat urinary incontinence in children with neuropathic bladders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1994 and 2005 an AUS was implanted in 35 patients (mean age 14.4; range 11.5-18). Upper urinary tract (UUT) evaluations and urodynamic studies were performed in all patients pre- and post-AUS implantation. Thirteen patients underwent enterocystoplasty combined with AUS placement and 22 underwent AUS implantation alone. RESULTS: An AUS was implanted in 35 patients. Mean follow-up is 5.5 years (range 0.4-11 years). Nine mechanical malfunctions occurred in seven patients (20%). Of the 22 patients who underwent AUS implantation alone, seven (31.2%) eventually required an enterocystoplasty because of unexpected bladder behaviour changes, usually within three years of AUS implantation. In seven patients (20%), a continent catheterisable stoma was made (before or during the follow-up) because of problems with clean intermittent catheterisation (CIC) through the urethra. Three AUS (8.6%) were removed because of sphincter erosion at the bladder neck. All 32 patients (91.4%) with the AUS currently in place are dry, three void their bladders spontaneously, and 29 need CIC. CONCLUSIONS: AUS must be considered as an elective treatment in the surgical management of these patients because it produces better continence rates than other methods. However, these patients need long-term follow-up because their bladder behaviour may undergo unexpected clinically asymptomatic changes that could negatively affect their UUT and require bladder augmentation.     

A single-centre long-term outcome analysis of artificial urinary sphincter placement in children

OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate the outcome of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement in 79 children, with a mean follow-up of 12.5 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 89 children had an AUS placed between 1977 and 1994; complete data were obtained for 79 (63 boys and 16 girls). The indication for AUS placement was urinary incontinence caused by sphincteric deficiency with a stable bladder. Before and after surgery, all patients underwent ultrasonography, voiding cysto-urethrography and urodynamics. Logistic regression was used to assess the factors influencing the outcome. RESULTS: The mean (range) age at surgery was 11.7 (3-18) years. The cause of incontinence was a neuropathic bladder in 74 patients and bladder exstrophy in five. At a mean (range) follow-up of 12.5 (5-22) years, 63 of 79 patients (80%) had an intact AUS. The AUS was removed in 16 patients (20%) because of erosion at a mean (range) of 5.6 (1-11) years after insertion; there were 0.035 revisions per patient-year. Of 63 patients with an AUS in place, 57 (90%) are completely dry and 36 (57%) are using clean intermittent catheterization. Thirteen patients (20%) developed bladder instability during the follow-up, which was managed by anticholinergics in eight, spinal cord de-tethering in three and enterocystoplasty in two. Hydronephrosis occurred in 12 of 126 renal units (10%) that improved after enterocystoplasty or anticholinergics. The overall 10-year survival of the AUS was 79% (78% for early models and 80% for the AMS800); the survival was not affected by age, sex, model, previous bladder neck surgery, augmentation cystoplasty or intermittent catheterization. Bladder exstrophy was associated with lower AUS survival, as four of the five patients affected had the AUS removed secondary to erosion (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: In children the AUS has a 79% 10-year survival and gives a 90% continence rate. Bladder instability after AUS placement can be managed with anticholinergics or enterocystoplasty. The AUS is not a justifiable treatment option for patients with bladder exstrophy.     

前列腺术后尿失禁及其防治

系统文献复习,对前列腺切除术后尿失禁的发生率、发生机制、危险因素、预防和治疗等内容进行了系统阐述.患者选择、外科技术的改进、围手术期盆底训练、药物治疗等手段是预防前列腺术后尿失禁的手段.治疗方法包括盆底训练、药物治疗等保守治疗,以及人工尿道括约肌(ALIS)植入术、填充剂注射术、尿道压迫及吊带术等外科治疗.其中AUS植入术仍然是治疗前列腺术后尿失禁的"金标准".     

A new artificial urinary sphincter with conditional occlusion for stress urinary incontinence: preliminary clinical results

OBJECTIVES: To perform a preliminary clinical investigation to determine the safety and efficacy of a novel artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) with conditional occlusion for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. METHODS: Male patients with urodynamically proven stress urinary incontinence after a prostatectomy were implanted with the novel AUS. They were followed up over a period of 12 months and the device tested for efficacy by using objective measurements of urinary leakage and continence. We derived a new measure for continence called the Continence Index. RESULTS: We have demonstrated that the patients receiving the new AUS showed a reduction of greater than 10-fold in mean daily leakage volume from 770.6 ml to 55.1 ml. There was an overall improvement in the Continence Index from 54% to 97%. CONCLUSIONS: The new AUS with conditional occlusion provides good continence rates and enables adjustment of regulating pressure in situ.     

Artificial urinary sphincter (AMS 800) implantation for women with intrinsic sphincter deficiency: a technique for insiders?

Study Type – Therapy (case series)
Level of Evidence 4 Artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation is one of several surgical options for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. It is indicated for women with both clinically and urodynamically defined intrinsic sphincter deficiency that significantly affects quality of life. The erosion/revision risk increases after several previous surgical interventions. Therefore, women believed to be candidates for AUS implantation should be rapidly (after the failure of a maximum of two previous surgical procedures) referred to specialized centres, where the knowledge and experience concerning the diagnosis, surgery and management of female stress urinary incontinence is concentrated. To refer correctly, non‐academic urologists/gynaecologists should also be well informed about AUS implantation. Only in this way can the patient weigh the high long‐term success rate and high quality of life improvement of AUS implantation against the greater complication/revision risk and take a well‐considered decision.     

Das transobturatorische Band (TOB)

The transobturator tape, a new technique for the treatment of female urinary stress incontinence, was evaluated with a 1 year follow-up.A total of 124 patients were treated with a low elasticity polypropylene tape according to the technique described by Delorme. The operative procedure is described step by step. All patients were followed-up after 3, 6 and 12 months.No intra-operative complications were observed. After 12 months 88.7% of the patients were cured and an additional 6.4% showed improvement.The transobturator technique (from exterior to interior) is, given proven indications and an exact consideration of the instructions, a simple, safe and efficient surgical procedure for the treatment of female urinary stress incontinence. The technique avoids complications such as bladder, intestinal and vascular lesions. It is suitable for genuine incontinence and patients with recurrent stress incontinence.     

One hundred artificial sphincters

One hundred patients with urinary incontinence of various aetiologies underwent implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). In 40 patients various reconstructive procedures of the lower urinary tract were carried out at the same time. In 93 patients the results were successful and they are continent. Six are incontinent and 4 of these await AUS replacement. One patient has had a urinary diversion with the sphincter still in situ and functioning. The complication rate was 45% (of which 29% were designated "sphincter-related"). Half of these were accounted for by two complications: one was a change in bladder behaviour in patients with neuropathic bladders and the other was stress incontinence as a direct result of implanting low pressure devices. If these two factors and the "sphincter-unrelated" problems are discounted, the complication rate was 13%. The AUS is a satisfactory and successful method of treatment for sphincter weakness incontinence regardless of aetiology and the results suggest no contraindication to implantation at the same time as reconstructive surgery of the lower urinary tract.     

Artificial urinary sphincters around intestinal segments--are they safe?

Artificial urinary sphincters (AUS) were implanted around intestinal segments to achieve urinary continence in 8 patients and faecal continence in 1. In 6 patients the cuff was placed around the lower end of the cystoplasty following bladder neck (5) or urethral (1) erosion. Four are completely dry, 1 on self-intermittent catheterisation (SIC). One has mild stress incontinence. In 1 patient the cuff eroded at 8 months. Two patients had cuffs implanted parastomally to create continent diversion. One is satisfactory on SIC and the other had her AUS explanted because of life-threatening metabolic acidosis. The rectal cuff was explanted because of faecal impaction above the cuff. As an absolute last resort, placing an AUS round a cystoplasty appears little more hazardous than round bladder neck. The use of the AUS for continent diversion has not been pursued because of reliable techniques of non-prosthetic continent diversion. The current model of the AUS is unsuitable for the treatment of faecal incontinence.     

Selection of patients for implantation of the Brantley Scott artificial urinary sphincter

The Brantley Scott artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is a safe, effective and relatively trouble-free device for the control of sphincter weakness incontinence. Suitable patients should have no other urodynamic dysfunction or have had such a dysfunction corrected or controlled. Patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence pose no problems in selection, although as a group they are the most prone to develop complications. Pure stress incontinence does not warrant implantation of an AUS except in very rare instances. In neuropathic dysfunction the AUS is one of several treatment options for the correction of incontinence and is most effectively used as such. In all patients, thorough pre-operative videourodynamic evaluation is essential to get the best results and therefore to justify the infective and mechanical risks and the expense of the device.     

Anastomotic contracture and incontinence after radical prostatectomy: a graded approach to management

PURPOSE: We present a heterogeneous group of men presenting with varying degrees of anastomotic contracture (AC) and associated stress urinary incontinence (SUI) following radical prostatectomy. It is particularly important that AC should be resolved before artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation, because instrumentation through the AUS can risk erosion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of 54 consecutive men who were referred for the management of AC and associated SUI were reviewed. Patient treatment and outcomes were stratified according to their unique characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients underwent radical prostatectomy alone (48), or in combination with radiation therapy (7) or cryotherapy (1). In group 1, 35 patients had previously undiscovered AC, or 1 or more prior contracture incisions (CIs) with SUI. CI and AUS were performed simultaneously in 33 patients and sequentially in 2. In group 2, 7 patients with intractable AC following multiple CIs/dilations and self-calibration, or an indwelling urethral or suprapubic catheter underwent simultaneous (3) or sequential (2) CI/AUS or CI only (2). Five patients required temporary self-calibration. In group 3, in 12 patients with total outlet obliteration recanalization was accomplished with combined antegrade/retrograde endoscopy and CI. Ten patients had re-obliteration, of whom 1 underwent suprapubic diversion and 9 underwent repeat recanalization with placement of a UroLume stent (American Medical Systems, Minnetonka, Minnesota) across the anastomosis. Eight patients underwent artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement 4 to 6 weeks later and 1 awaits an AUS. Of those implanted with an AUS 2 required repeat endoscopic procedures because of recurrent but manageable stent ingrowth. CONCLUSIONS: Most ACs are treated successfully with simultaneous, aggressive CI/AUS. A history of many CIs or long, dense contractures suggest the need for staged management. In those with obliterated outlets we prefer to reestablish patency and if rapid recurrence develops, we place a UroLume stent. Regardless of a history of radiation therapy, continence is restored with an AUS.     

Therapie der weiblichen Belastungsinkontinenz

Implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is an established surgical option for treating female stress urinary incontinence due to internal sphincter deficiency (ISD). However, this operation is often performed as an open surgical procedure. Here, we introduce an endoscopic extraperitoneal approach for implanting an artificial urinary sphincter.Two women (ages 22 and 79 years) underwent endoscopic extraperitoneal implantation of the AMS 800 artificial sphincter. In both cases, neurogenic bladder disease was the underlying cause of ISD.The endoscopic extraperitoneal approach allowed excellent preparation and mobilisation of the bladder neck and implantation of the AUS. The overall operating time was <120 min. Both patients were mobilised on the same day and could be discharged from the hospital after 5-6 days. The AUS were activated after 6-9 weeks. However, after an average of 6 months, total continence was achieved in both patients.Laparoscopic extraperitoneal implantation of AUS in women with moderate to severe stress urinary incontinence is safe and might be less traumatic to neighbouring organs than the open operation. However, more implantations are needed to evaluate the long-term feasibility of this method.     

Role of the artificial urinary sphincter in the treatment of stress incontinence in women.

The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is rarely indicated in the treatment of women with stress incontinence because most of these women have deficient urethral support rather than pure sphincter weakness and the AUS is a treatment specifically for pure sphincter weakness. The procedure is contraindicated after pelvic radiotherapy and after previous sling surgery because of the high incidence of cuff erosion. Otherwise the artificial sphincter gives excellent results comparable to those seen in men with post-prostatectomy incontinence and much better than in neuropathic bladder dysfunction.