The effectiveness of adjustable trans-obturator male system (ATOMS) in radiated patients is reduced: A propensity score-matched analysis.

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of the adjustable trans-obturator male system (ATOMS®) to treat post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) in radiated patients compared with non-radiated patients, using propensity score-matching analysis to enhance the validity of the comparison. Patients and methods: Consecutive men with PPI treated with silicone-covered scrotal port ATOMS (A.M.I., Feldkirch, Austria) in nine different institutions between 2016 and 2022 were included. Preoperative assessment evaluated 24-h pad usage, urethroscopy and urodynamics, if indicated. Propensity score-matching analysis was based on age, length of follow-up, previous PPI treatment, previous bladder neck stricture, androgen deprivation and pad usage. The primary endpoint was dry rate, defined as no pads post-operatively with a security pad allowed. The secondary endpoints were complications, device removal and self-perceived satisfaction with the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale. Results: Of the 710 included patients, 342 were matched, and the study groups were balanced for the baseline matched variables. The mean baseline 24-h pad was 4.8 in both groups (p = 0.48). The mean follow-up was 27.5 ± 18.6 months, which was also equivalent between groups (p = 0.36). The primary outcome was achieved in 73 (42.7%) radiated patients and in 115 (67.3%) non-radiated patients (p < 0.0001). The mean pad count at the last follow-up was 1.5 and 0.8, respectively (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in complications (p = 0.94), but surgical revision and device explant rates were higher (p = 0.03 and p = 0.01, respectively), and the proportion of patients highly satisfied (PGI-I = 1) was lower in the radiated group (p = 0.01). At sensitivity analysis, the study was found to be reasonably robust to hidden bias. Conclusion: ATOMS implantation significantly outperformed in patients without adjuvant radiation over radiated patients.

Results of Adjustable Trans-Obturator Male System in Patients with Prostate Cancer Treated with Prostatectomy and Radiotherapy: A Multicenter Study.

(1) Background: Treatment of male stress incontinence in patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy and adjuvant pelvic radiation is a therapeutic challenge. The efficacy and safety of the adjustable trans-obturator male system (ATOMS) in these patients is not well established, despite the general belief that outcomes are worse than in patients without radiation. (2) Methods: Retrospective multicenter study evaluating patients treated with silicone-covered scrotal port (SSP) ATOMS implant after radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in nine different institutions between 2016 and 2022. The primary endpoint was dry patient rate, defined as pad-test ≤ 20 mL/day. The secondary endpoints were complication rate (defined using Clavien-Dindo classification), device removal and self-perceived satisfaction using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale. Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Fisher's exact test and logistic regression were performed using stepwise method with a 0.15 entry and 0.1 stay criteria. (3) Results: 223 patients fulfilled the criteria for inclusion and 12 (5.4%) received salvage prostatectomy after radiation and 27 (12.1%) previous devices for stress incontinence. After ATOMS adjustment, 95 patients (42.6%) were dry and 36 (16.1%) had complications of any grade (grade I, n = 20; grade II, n = 11; grade III, n = 5) during the first 3 months postoperatively. At a mean of 36 ± 21 months follow-up, the device was explanted in 26 (11.7%) patients. Regarding self-perceived satisfaction with the implant, 105 of 125 patients (84%) considered themselves satisfied (PGI-I 1 to 3). In the univariate analysis, dryness was associated to younger age (p = 0.06), primary prostatectomy (p = 0.08), no previous incontinence surgery (p = 0.02), absence of overactive bladder symptoms (p = 0.04), absence of bladder neck stricture (p = 0.001), no need of surgical revision (p = 0.008) and lower baseline incontinence severity (p = 0.0003). Multivariate analysis identified absence of surgical revision (p = 0.018), absence of bladder neck stricture (p = 0.05), primary prostatectomy (p = 0.07) and lower baseline incontinence severity (p < 0.0001) were independent predictors of dryness. A logistic regression model was proposed and internally validated. (4) Conclusions: ATOMS is an efficacious and safe alternative to treat male incontinence after radical prostatectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy. Factors predictive of dryness are identified in this complex scenario to allow for better patient selection.

A New Proximal Adjustable Sling ATOMS SSP® Implantation Technique with Focus on the Urethral Bulb: Lessons Learned from Revision Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Adjustable sling ATOMS-SSP results in ventral compression of the urethra with favorable results in the treatment of men with mild to moderate stress incontinence. However, with transobturator tunneling and mesh fixation, the surgeon has a range of options, which leads to different results and sometimes unfavorable positioning of the silicone cushion. Using retrograde urethrography (RUG), we identified ATOMS patients with considerable misplacement. We then modified the implantation technique when we performed the revision, and now present here our first experiences with this new surgical technique. METHODS: Patients after ATOMS-SSP implantation at our clinic were systematically subjected to a RUG if incontinence persisted after adjustments. In case of unfavorable positioning, a revision was performed with the aim of achieving an idealized urethroproximal position of the silicone pad. During follow-up, a repeat RUG was performed, and both subjective and objective outcome parameters were recorded. RESULTS: Four men met the above criteria and underwent revision with reimplantation using our new technique. All patients postoperatively experienced significantly improved continence. RUGs demonstrated an ideal ATOMS position immediately below the proximal bulbar urethra. CONCLUSIONS: Our proximal implantation technique, presented here for the first time, allows optimal positioning of the ATOMS SSP, which is reflected in the objective parameters and RUG. Its use in primary implantation should also be considered and an expansion to the indication of severe stress incontinence seems possible, but this should only be done in studies.

Is the Standard Artificial Urinary Sphincter AMS 800 Still a Treatment Option for the Irradiated Male Patient Presenting with a Devastated Bladder Outlet?

BACKGROUND: Circular urethral compression with an artificial sphincter allows control of voiding, even in patients with severe stress urinary incontinence, but it heightens the risk of urethral atrophy and erosion. This study of one of the largest populations of patients treated with radiotherapy investigates the additive effect of the post-radiogenic stricture of the membranous urethra/bladder neck on AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter outcomes. METHODS: In a retrospective multicenter cohort study, we analyzed patients fitted with an AMS 800, comparing those who had received radiotherapy with patients presenting a devastated bladder outlet (stricture of the membranous urethra/bladder neck). We determined the correlation between these groups of patients using both univariate and stepwise adjusted multivariate regression. The revision-free interval was estimated by a Kaplan-Meier plot and compared by applying the log-rank test. A p value below 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of the 123 irradiated patients we identified, 62 (50.4%) had undergone at least one prior desobstruction for bladder-neck/urethra stenosis. After a mean follow-up of 21 months, the latter tended to achieve social continence less frequently (25.7% vs. 35%; p = 0.08). Revision was required significantly more often for this group (43.1% vs. 26.3%; p = 0.05) due to urethral erosion in 18 of 25 cases. A stenosis recurred in five cases; desobstruction was performed in two cases, leading to erosion in both. Multivariate analysis revealed a significantly higher risk of revision when recurrent stenosis necessitated at least two prior desobstructions (HR 2.8; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: A devastated bladder outlet is associated with a lower proportion of men with social continence and a significantly higher need for revision compared with irradiated patients without a history of urethral stenosis. Alternative surgical procedures should be discussed beforehand, especially in cases of recurrent urethral stenosis.

ATOMS (Adjustable Trans-Obturator Male System) in Patients with Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence and Previously Treated Urethral Stricture or Bladder Neck Contracture.

(1) Background: Male stress incontinence in patients with previously treated urethral or bladder neck stricture is a therapeutic challenge. The efficacy and safety of the adjustable trans-obturator male system (ATOMS) in these patients is unknown. (2) Methods: All patients with primary ATOMS implants in our institution between 2014 and 2021 were included. The outcomes of patients with previously treated urethral or bladder neck stricture (≥6 months before ATOMS implant) and stable 16Ch urethral caliber were compared to those without a history of stricture. The primary endpoint was the dry patient rate, defined as the pad test ≤ 20 mL/day, and complication rate, including device removal. The secondary variable was self-perceived satisfaction using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale. Wilcoxon rank sum test, Fisher's exact test and logistic regression were performed. (3) Results: One hundred and forty-nine consecutive patients were included, twenty-one (14%) previously treated for urethral or bladder neck stricture (seven urethroplasty, nine internal urethrotomy and five bladder neck incision). After ATOMS adjustment, 38% of the patients with treated stricture were continent compared to 83% of those without (p < 0.0001). After weighted matched observations using propensity score pairing, the proportion of continent patients without a previous stricture was 56% (p = 0.236). Complications occurred in 29% of the patients with stricture and in 20% of those without (p = 0.34). The severity of the complications was distributed evenly among the groups (p = 0.42). Regarding self-perceived satisfaction with the implant, 90% of the patients with stricture perceived the results satisfactorily (PGI-I 1−3) compared to 97% of the rest (p = 0.167). Stricture was associated with radiotherapy (p < 0.0001) and time from prostatectomy to implantation (p = 0.012). There was a moderate correlation between previous stricture and the severity of incontinence, both evaluated according to the 24-h pad test (Rho = 0.378; p < 0.0001) and the ICIQ-SF questionnaire (Rho = 0.351; p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis for the factors predictive of failure after ATOMS adjustment revealed previous stricture (OR 4.66; 95% CI 1.2−18.87), baseline 24-h pad test (per 100 mL, OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.09−1.52) and final cushion volume (per mL, OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.19−1.55). This model predicted dryness with an AUC of 92%. After the PSMATCH procedure using a propensity score, the model remained unchanged, with the previous stricture (OR 8.05; 95% CI 1.08−110.83), baseline 24-h pad test (per 100 mL, OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.15−2.26) and final cushion volume (per mL, OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.17−2) being independent predictors and an AUC of 93%. (4) Conclusions: ATOMS can be used to treat male stress incontinence in patients with a history of stricture, although the effectiveness of the device is reduced. On the other hand, the security and perceived satisfaction were equivalent for both groups.

Supratrigonal cystectomy and augmentation cystoplasty with ileum or ileocecum in the treatment of ulcerative interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome: a 14-year follow-up.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study analyzes the long-term results of supratrigonal cystectomy and augmentation cystoplasty in patients with severe ulcerative interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) and reduced bladder capacity. METHODS: Outcome data were retrospectively and prospectively collected and analyzed in women who underwent supratrigonal cystectomy and augmentation cystoplasty for ulcerative IC/BPS at Muenster University Hospital between 1991 and 2006. We used cross-tabulation and Pearson's Chi-squared test to examine how outcome is influenced by age, preoperative functional bladder volume, and choice of augmentation material. RESULTS: After a median 171-month follow-up, analysis could be done in 26 of 27 patients. Persistent pain necessitated early revision in 2 patients (7.7%). Mean postoperative O'Leary Sant IC Score was 12.7 in the prospectively questioned patients. Responses to Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) were: "very much better" in 15 cases (65.2%) and "much better" in 7 (30.4%). Twelve patients (52.2%) emptied their augmented bladder voluntarily, whereas 7 (32%) needed intermittent self-catheterization (ISC). The rate of patients requiring ISC tended to be lower when detubularized ileocecal bowel was used. All 5 patients (19.2%) with late relapse of ulcerative IC/BPS needed ISC. CONCLUSIONS: Severe ulcerative IC/BPS can be curatively treated in some patients by supratrigonal cystectomy and augmentation, which is associated with a high satisfaction rate and few long-term complications even over a very long follow-up. In our analysis, the need for ISC is a risk factor for late relapse, although ileocecal augmentation could increase the proportion of patients with sufficient voluntary micturition.

Influence of ATOMS implant on the voiding phase of patients with post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence.

OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in voiding phase, especially urethral resistance after post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) treatment with the Adjustable TransObturator Male System (ATOMS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A longitudinal prospective study was performed on 45 men treated with ATOMS for PPI, with the intention to evaluate the changes produced by the implant on the voiding phase. Patients with preoperative urodynamic study were offered postoperative urodynamic evaluation, and both studies were compared. The following urodynamic date were evaluated: maximum voiding detrusor pressure, detrusor pressure at maximum flow rate, maximum flow rate (Qmax), voiding volume, post-void residue, bladder outlet obstruction index (BOOI), urethral resistance factor (URA), and bladder contractility index (BCI). The statistical analysis used were the mean comparison test for dependent groups (Student's t test) for parametric variables and the Wilcoxon test for non-parametric variables. The signification level was set at 95% bilateral. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients (82.2%) used zero pads/day at the time of urodynamic postoperative evaluation and pad-test evolved from 592 ± 289 ml baseline to 25 ± 40 ml (p = 0.0001). Significant differences were observed in Qmax (15 ± 8.3 before and 11 ± 8.3 after surgery; p = 0.008), voiding volume (282 ± 130.7 before and 184 ± 99.92 after surgery). BOOI (-12 ± 23.9 before and -2 ± 21.4 after surgery; p = 0.025) and BCI (93 ± 46.4 before and 76 ± 46.0 after surgery; p = 0.044). In no case did we observe postoperative bladder outlet obstruction, according to URA parameter below 29 cm H2 O in all cases. There was not a significant variation either in post-void urinary residual volume (15 ± 47.4 before and 14 ± 24.2 after surgery, p = 0.867). CONCLUSIONS: The ATOMS implant induces a decrease of Qmax, voided volume, and bladder contractility and an increase of BOOI. However, our findings suggest that ATOMS device does not cause bladder outlet obstruction.

Adjustable Transobturator Male System (ATOMS) Infection: Causative Organisms and Clinical Profile.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical profile and the organisms producing adjustable transobturator male system (ATOMS) infection in a contemporary series. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study evaluating patients undergoing ATOMS explant for clinical signs of infection from a series of 902 patients treated in 9 academic institutions. Clinical and microbiological data were evaluated. RESULTS: Infection presented in 24 patients (2.7%). The median age was 73 ± 7yrs and the median interval from ATOMS implantation to explant 11 ± 26.5mo. Infection was diagnosed within 3-months after surgery in 7(29.2%). Scrotal port erosion was present in 6 cases (25%) and systemic symptoms of parenchymatous testicular infection in 2(8.3%). The culture of the periprosthetic fluid was positive in 20(83.3%): 12(50%) Gram-negative bacteria, 9(37.5%) Gram-positive cocci and 1(4.2%) yeast. The most frequent isolates were Enterococcus and Proteus sp. (16.7% each), followed by Pseudomona sp. and S. epidermidis (12.5% each). Methicillin resistant S. aureus was detected only in 1 case (4.2%). Despite the infection 17 patients (70.8%) were satisfied with the implant and 18(75%) received a second device (11 repeated ATOMS and 7 AUS) at a median 9.7 ± 12.6mo after explant. Limitations include retrospective design and lack of microbiological cultures in ATOMS explanted for non-infective cause. CONCLUSION: Infection of a prosthetic device is a disturbing complication. A proportion of patients with ATOMS infection is associated to scrotal port erosion and/or parenchymatous urinary tract infection. Enterococcus and Proteus sp. are the most common organisms producing ATOMS infection and this could have implications for the selection of the most appropriate surgical prophylaxis.

Artificial urinary sphincter or a second adjustable transobturator male system offer equivalent outcomes in patients whom required revision on the initial ATOMS device: An international multi-institutional experience.

AIM: To evaluate treatment options after surgical revision of adjustable transobturator male system (ATOMS) and the results of further incontinence implantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study evaluating patients with surgical revision of ATOMS in academic institutions. Causes and factors affecting revision-free interval were studied and also the frequency of device explant and placement of second ATOMS or artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) at surgeon discretion. Operative results, complications (Clavien-Dindo), and efficacy (postoperative pad-test, pad-count, patient satisfaction, and patient global impression of improvement [PGI-I scale]) of each treatment option were compared. RESULTS: Seventy-eight out of 902 patients (8.65%) with ATOMS underwent surgical revision at 4.1 ± 2.4 years mean follow-up and 75 (8.3%) were explanted. The main causes for revision included persistence of incontinence (35.9%) and scrotal port erosion (34.6%). Independent risk factors of the shortened revision-free interval were previous anti-incontinence surgery (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.06-3.16; p = 0.007) and port erosion (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.06-3.16; p = 0.0027). Fifty-eight (6.4%) received a second implant: 31 repeated ATOMS and 27 AUS. Operative time was longer for AUS (p = .003). The visual analog scale of pain at hospital discharge (p = 0.837) and postoperative complications (p = 0.154) were equivalent. The predominant cuff size for AUS was 4.5 cm (59.3%). Mean follow-up after the second implant was 29.1 ± 25.8 months. Postoperative efficacy of secondary treatment results favored ATOMS based on pad-test (p = 0.016), pad-count (p = 0.029), patient satisfaction (p = 0.04), and PGI-I (p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: ATOMS surgical revision due to different reasons generally leads to device explant. Rescue treatment is possible with ATOMS or AUS. No difference in postoperative complications was detected between secondary devices, but efficacy favors repeating ATOMS implantation.

Patient Selection in Surgical Centers of Expertise in the Treatment of Patients with Moderate to Severe Male Urinary Stress Incontinence.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze decision-making in patients with male urinary incontinence (SUI) in centers of expertise. The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) remains the gold standard for male patients with moderate to severe SUI but adjustable male slings are a minimally invasive treatment option with good results, hence without a high level of evidence regarding the optimal patient selection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 220 patients (88 AUS; 132 adjustable slings) were investigated from the DOMINO database that underwent surgery between 2010 and 2012 in 5 urological departments that offer adjustable sling systems as well as AUS systems for patients with moderate to severe urinary incontinence. For statistical analysis, the Mann-Whitney U test was used to identify differences between both groups. RESULTS: Patients selected for an adjustable male sling were less likely to have a neurological disease (5.3 vs. 9.1%; p = 0.030), a prior urethral stricture (22.7 vs. 50.0%; p = 0.001), a prior incontinence surgery (24.4 vs. 45.5%; p = 0.01), or a prior radiation therapy (26.5 vs. 40.1%; p = 0.001). The severity of preoperative incontinence was higher in patients selected for an AUS with a mean pad usage per day of 7.60 versus 5.80 (p < 0.001). Mean postoperative pad usage and patients' subjective perception were comparable in both groups. CONCLUSION: In centers offering both options, the decision-making is mainly based upon presence of radiation therapy and previous failed incontinence surgery. Despite the more complex patient cohort selected for an AUS implantation with a possible impact on the postoperative outcome, the functional results seem to be comparable indicating a proper preoperative patient assessment and selection in this cohort.

Fixed or adjustable sling in the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence: results from a large cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Fixed and adjustable male slings for the treatment of male urinary stress incontinence became increasingly popular during the last decade. Although fixed slings are recommended for the treatment of mild to moderate stress urinary incontinence, there is still a lack of evidence regarding the precise indication for an adjustable male sling. Furthermore, there is still no evidence that one type of male sling is superior to another. However, both, adjustable and fixed slings, are commonly utilized in daily clinical practice. This current investigation aims to evaluate the differences between fixed and adjustable male slings regarding indications, complication rates and functional outcome in the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence in current clinical practice. METHODS: A total of 294 patients with a fixed and 176 patients with an adjustable male sling were evaluated in a multicenter single arm cohort trial. Data collection was performed retrospectively according the medical record. Functional outcome was prospectively analyzed by standardized, validated questionnaires. Descriptive statistics was performed to present patient characteristics, complication rates and functional outcome. A chi2-test for categorical and independent t-test for continuous variables was performed to identify heterogeneity between the groups and to correlate preoperative characteristics with the outcome. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Patients with higher degree of urinary incontinence (P<0.001) and risk factors such as history of pelvic irradiation (P<0.001) or prior surgery for urethral stricture (P=0.032) were more likely to receive an adjustable MS. Complication rates were comparable except for infection (P=0.009, 0 vs. 2.3%) and pain (P=0.001, 1.7% vs. 11.3%) which occurred more frequently in adjustable slings. Functional outcome according validated questionnaires demonstrated no differences between fixed and adjustable male slings. CONCLUSIONS: Adjustable male slings are more frequently utilized in patients with higher degree of incontinence and risk factors compared to fixed slings. No differences could be identified between functional outcome which may imply an advantage for adjustability. However, pain and infection rates were significantly higher in adjustable MS and should be considered in the decision process for sling type.

High/low-volume center experience predicts outcome of AMS 800 in male stress incontinence: Results of a large middle European multicenter case series.

AIM: To analyze the influence of implantation volume of artificial sphincters (AMS 800) on outcome in a large central European multicenter cohort study. METHODS: As part of the DOMINO (Debates on Male Incontinence) project, the surgical procedures and outcomes were retrospectively analyzed in a total of 473 patients who received an artificial sphincter (AMS 800) between 2010 and 2012. Clinics that implanted at least 10 AMS 800 per year were defined as high-volume centers. RESULTS: Sixteen centers had a mean rate of 9.54 AMS 800/y of which five clinics were identified as high-volume centers. They implanted significantly more double cuffs (55% vs 12.1%; P < .001), used the perineal approach significantly more often (78% vs 67.7%; P = .003) and chose larger mean cuff sizes (4.63 cm vs 4.42 cm; P = .002). With a mean follow-up of 18 months, the revision rate was significantly higher at low-volume centers (38.5% vs 26.7%; P = .037), urethral erosion being the main reason for revision. Social continence (0-1 pads/24 h) was achieved significantly more often in high-volume centers (45.5% vs 24.2%; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed significantly better continence results and lower revision rates at high-volume centers, confirming earlier results that are still true in this decade. We, therefore, recommend surgery for male incontinence at qualified centers.

Do voiding urodynamic parameters predict the success of adjustable transobturator male system (ATOMS) to treat postprostatectomy urinary incontinence?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether urodynamic voiding risk factors can be predictive of failure of postprostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) treatment with adjustable transobturator male system (ATOMS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We carried out a longitudinal study on 77 males treated for PPI with ATOMS. Patients were submitted preoperatively to a urodynamic study. The postoperative outcome was checked by pad-test. Treatment success was defined as daily pad-test below 10 mL. Statistical analysis used were Fisher exact test, χ2 lineal by lineal test, Student t test, and logistic regression analysis. The signification level was set at 95% bilateral. RESULTS: Treatment was successful in 54 patients (70%) achieving continence. The urodynamic parameters that related to postoperative continence outcome were the cystometric bladder capacity (direct relationship with continence (P = .019), type of voiding (more probability to achieve continence in patients who voided voluntarily followed by patients with involuntary voiding and abdominal straining voiding) (P = .034), Bladder Outlet Obstruction Index (BOOI) (inversely related with continence) (P = .025), and maximum voiding abdominal pressure (inversely related with continence) (P = .049). Multivariate analysis showed that cystometric bladder capacity (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.00), BOOI (OR, 0.97; CI, 0.99-0.94), and maximum abdominal bladder pressure (OR, 0.97; CI, 0.98-0.94) were independent risk factors to predict treatment success after ATOMS implant. CONCLUSIONS: The study of functional voiding parameters is useful to know the risk factors that influence postoperative outcome of PPI with ATOMS device. These findings could be of primary importance to facilitate optimum patient selection for this implant and therefore improve operative results.

Secondary Sling Implantation after Failure of Primary Surgical Treatment for Male Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the surgical gold standard after previously failed surgical treatment for male urinary stress incontinence. The evidence for a male sling as salvage treatment is poor, but there is a proportion of patients that refuse implantation of an AUS or have a relative contraindication. The goal of our retrospective study was an analysis of outcome and complications of patients with a secondary sling after previously failed surgery for stress urinary incontinence (SUI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on 186 patients who had a prior incontinence surgery were extracted from the DOMINO database. 139 patients (74.7%) received an AUS and 41 patients (22.0%) who had received a secondary sling system between 2010 and 2012 after previously failed surgery for male urinary incontinence could be identified and were further analyzed. RESULTS: Eight patients (19.5%) received a secondary repositioning sling and 33 patients (80.5%) received a secondary adjustable sling system. A prior surgery for urethral stricture was performed in 4 patients (9.8%). No major intraoperative complications were reported. A simultaneous explantation was performed in 12 patients (29.3%). The mean number of pad reductions was 4.93 (p = 0.026). No intraoperative complications and no postoperative surgical revisions were reported. The mean follow-up of the patient cohort with a secondary sling was 16 months. CONCLUSION: We provide the largest cohort of male patients up to date with a secondary sling after primary failure of surgery for male SUI. Although the procedure is a rarely performed surgery and without a high level of evidence, a secondary adjustable male sling system might be a feasible option in selected patients with acceptable complication rates, whereas a valuable outcome regarding continence rates cannot be sufficiently supplied by our data.

Retropubic vs transobturator Argus adjustable male sling: Results from a multicenter study.

AIMS: To comparatively analyse outcomes after ARGUS classic and ArgusT adjustable male sling implantation in a real-world setting. METHODS: Inclusion criteria encompassed: non-neurogenic, moderate-to-severe stress urinary incontinence (≥2 pads), implantation of an ARGUS classic or ArgusT male sling between 2010 and 2012 in a high-volume center (>150 previous implantations). Functional outcomes were assessed using daily pad usage, 24-hour pad testing, and International Consultation on Incontinence (ICIQ-SF) questionnaires. Continence was defined as zero pads per 24 hours. Complications were graded using Clavien-Dindo scale. For multivariate analysis, binary logistic regression models were used (P < .05). RESULTS: A total of 106 patients (n = 74 [ARGUS classic], n = 32 [ArgusT]) from four centers were eligible. Median follow-up was 44.0 months (24-64). Patient cohorts were well-balanced. We observed a statistical trend in favor of ARGUS classic regarding postoperative urine loss based on standardized 24-hour pad test (71 ± 162 g [ARGUS classic] vs 160 ± 180 g [ArgusT]); P = .066]. Dry rates were 33.3% (ARGUS classic) and 11.8% (ArgusT, P = .114). In multivariable analysis, ArgusT male sling could not be confirmed as an independent predictor of decreased success (OR, 0.587; 95% CI; 0.166-2.076, P = .408). There were no Clavien IV and V complications. Inguinal pain was significantly higher after ArgusT implantation (P = .033). Explantation rates were higher for ArgusT compared to ARGUS classic (14.0 vs 23.3%; P = .371). Longer device survival for the ARGUS classic male sling was observed in Kaplan-Meier analysis (P = .198). CONCLUSIONS: In the largest comparative analysis of ARGUS classic and ArgusT male sling with the longest follow-up to date, we observed low continence rates with superior functional outcomes and decreased explantation rates after ARGUS classic implantation.

The impact of perioperative complications on favorable outcomes after artificial urinary sphincter implantation for post-prostatectomy incontinence

ABSTRACT Objective To investigate the effect of perioperative complications involving artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation on rates of explantation and continence as well as health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Materials and methods Inclusion criteria encompassed non-neurogenic, moderate-to-severe stress urinary incontinence (SUI) post radical prostatectomy and primary implantation of an AUS performed by a high-volume surgeon (>100 previous implantations). Reporting complications followed the validated Clavien-Dindo scale and Martin criteria. HRQOL was assessed by the validated IQOL score, continence by the validated ICIQ-SF score. Statistical analysis included Chi (2) test, Mann-Whitney-U test, and multivariate regression models (p <0.05). Results 105 patients from 5 centers met the inclusion criteria. After a median follow-up of 38 months, explantation rates were 27.6% with a continence rate of 48.4%. In the age-adjusted multivariate analysis, perioperative urinary tract infection was confirmed as an independent predictor of postoperative explantation rates [OR 24.28, 95% CI 2.81-209.77, p=0.004). Salvage implantation (OR 0.114, 95% CI 0.02-0.67, p=0.016) and non-prostatectomy related incontinence (OR 0.104, 95% CI 0.02-0.74, p=0.023) were independent predictors for worse continence outcomes. Low visual analogue scale scores (OR 9.999, 95% CI 1,42-70.25, p=0.021) and ICIQ-SF scores, respectively (OR 0.674, 95% CI 0.51-0.88, p=0.004) were independent predictors for increased HRQOL outcomes. Perioperative complications did not significantly impact on continence and HRQOL outcomes. Conclusion Findings show postoperative infections adversely affect device survival after AUS implantation. However, if explantation can be avoided, the comparative long-term functional results and HRQOL outcomes are similar between patients with or without perioperative complications.

The AdVance and AdVanceXP male sling in urinary incontinence: is there a difference?

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and perioperative complications of the AdVanceXP with the original AdVance male sling. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 109 patients with an AdVance and 185 patients with an AdVanceXP male sling. The baseline characteristics and complication rates were analyzed retrospectively. Functional outcome and quality of life were evaluated prospectively by standardized, validated questionnaires. The Chi2-test for categorical and Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables were performed to identify heterogeneity between the groups. RESULTS: Regarding operation time, there was no significant difference between the slings (p = 0.146). The complication rates were comparable in both groups except for postoperative urinary retention. This occurred significantly more often in patients with the AdVanceXP (p = 0.042). During follow-up, no differences could be identified regarding ICIQ-SF, PGI or I-QoL or number of pad usage. CONCLUSIONS: The AdVance and AdVanceXP are safe and effective treatment options for male stress urinary incontinence. However, the innovations of the AdVanceXP sling did not demonstrate a superiority over the original AdVance sling regarding functional outcome.

The TiLOOP® Male Sling: Did We Forejudge.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TiLOOP® male sling (pfm medical, Cologne, Germany) used in the treatment for male stress urinary incontinence (SUI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated a total of 34 patients with a TiLOOP® male sling. Perioperative complication rates were assessed and validated questionnaires were prospectively evaluated to assess quality of life and satisfaction rate. Outcome and complication rates were analysed by using descriptive statistics. Correlation of continence outcome and risk factors was performed with the chi-square test. A p value below 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The majority of patients (70.6%) were diagnosed with mild or moderate male SUI. During surgery, one instance (2.9%) of intraoperative urethral injury was observed. There were no immediate postoperative complications. The mean follow-up time was 44.6 months. An improvement of male SUI was reported by 61.9% of the patients and 38.1% reported no change according the Patient Global Impression of Improvement. The mean perineal pain score was 0.5 according to the international index of pain. CONCLUSIONS: The TiLOOP® is a safe treatment option for male SUI in our cohort with a low complication rate. However, the functional outcome of the TiLOOP® was inferior when compared to the outcome of the AdVance® male sling.

Mulitcenter study on antibiotic prophylaxis, infectious complications and risk assessment in TUR-P.

INTRODUCTION: Transurethral resection of the prostate is one of the most frequent urological procedures. Urinary tract infections represent major sequelae, but data about antibiotic prophylaxis in TUR-P are controversial and outdated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicentre study of TUR-P in ten German hospitals. Primary endpoints were epidemiological and outcome data of TUR-P. Secondary endpoints were the identification of factors associated with febrile UTIs and sepsis after TUR-P. RESULTS: We included 444 patients with a median age of 71.0 years. Nearly every patient (93.5%) received some kind of antibiotic prophylaxis. Complication rates were 4.9% for febrile UTIs and 2.3% sepsis. Significant risk factors associated with febrile UTIs were pre-existing risk factors for UTIs (p = 0.035) and a duration of catheterization of more than three days (p <0.0001). Significant risk factors for sepsis were duration of surgery of more than 60 minutes (p = 0.030) and again a duration of catheterization of more than three days (p <0.0001). Interestingly, 50.8% of the cases had evidence of chronic prostatitis in their histological specimen. This evidence of chronic prostatitis was significantly associated with febrile UTIs (p = 0.019) and sepsis (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Duration of catheterization is one of the major risk factors for infectious complications after TUR-P. Antibiotic prophylaxis in TUR-P needs prospective investigation. These future studies should also address chronic prostatitis a priori.

Registry of implants for the reconstruction of pelvic floor in males and females: A feasibility case series.

INTRODUCTION: Most aspects of implant-assisted reconstruction of pelvic floor in males and females are under debate and the research is not standardized. Registries are supposed to shed light to the indications, surgical techniques and material properties and to establish a standardized evaluation. METHODS: A working group was formed to create an online platform for registration and outcome measurement of implant-assisted operations for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and female and male stress urinary incontinence (SUI). 20 patients with modified mesh materials were evaluated over 23 months follow up in the registry to prove the feasibility of the registry. For validation a previously published modified "satisfaction, anatomy, continence, safety - S.(A.)C.S score" was used. RESULTS: A consensus was met on definitions and classifications of patient variables, surgical procedures and implants, as well as outcome parameters (efficacy, continence, satisfaction, complications). Different subgroup modules were formed in accordance with treated condition. The maximum score of cure was reached by 25-100% of patients depending on the indication. CONCLUSION: A prospective registry in accordance with IDEAL-D framework is justified for the evaluation and regulation of implants for pelvic floor reconstruction.