Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 53
Filter
3.
Asian Journal of Andrology ; (6): 154-157, 2020.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1009783

ABSTRACT

Urge urinary incontinence (UUI) is one of the most troublesome complications of surgery of the prostate whether for malignancy or benign conditions. For many decades, there have been attempts to reduce the morbidity of this outcome with variable results. Since its development in the 1970s, the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has been the "gold standard" for treatment of the most severe cases of UUI. Other attempts including injectable bulking agents, previous sphincter designs, and slings have been developed, but largely abandoned because of poor long-term efficacy and significant complications. The AUS has had several sentinel redesigns since its first introduction to reduce erosion and infection and increase efficacy. None of these changes in the basic AUS design have occurred in the past three decades, and the AUS remains the same despite newer technology and materials that could improve its function and safety. Recently, newer compressive devices and slings to reposition the bladder neck for men with mild-to-moderate UUI have been developed with success in select patients. Similarly, the AUS has had applied antibiotic coating to all portions except the pressure-regulating balloon (PRB) to reduce infection risk. The basic AUS design, however, has not changed. With newer electronic technology, the concept of the electronic AUS or eAUS has been proposed and several possible iterations of this eAUS have been reported. While the eAUS is as yet not available, its development continues and a prototype device may be available soon. Possible design options are discussed in this review.


Subject(s)
Humans , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Prosthesis Design , Urinary Incontinence, Urge/surgery , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
4.
Asian Journal of Andrology ; (6): 39-44, 2020.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1009779

ABSTRACT

Penile prosthesis implant (PPI) remains an effective and safe treatment option for men with erectile dysfunction (ED). However, PPI surgery can be associated with a higher risk of complications in certain populations. This article provides a critical review of relevant publications pertaining to PPI in men with diabetes, significant corporal fibrosis, spinal cord injury, concurrent continence surgery, and complex salvage cases. The discussion of each category of special populations includes a brief review of the surgical challenges and a practical action-based set of recommendations. While specific patient populations posed considerable challenges in PPI surgery, strict pre- and postoperative management coupled with safe surgical practice is a prerequisite to achieving excellent clinical outcomes and high patient satisfaction rate.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Diabetes Complications , Diabetes Mellitus , Erectile Dysfunction/surgery , Penile Implantation , Penile Induration/surgery , Penile Prosthesis , Priapism/surgery , Prosthesis-Related Infections/prevention & control , Salvage Therapy , Spinal Cord Injuries/complications , Suburethral Slings , Surgical Wound Infection/prevention & control , Urinary Incontinence/surgery , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
5.
Asian Journal of Andrology ; (6): 45-50, 2020.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1009778

ABSTRACT

The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) remains the standard of care in men with severe stress urinary incontinence (SUI) following prostate surgery and radiation. While the current AUS provides an effective, safe, and durable treatment option, it is not without its limitations and complications, especially with regard to its utility in some "high-risk" populations. This article provides a critical review of relevant publications pertaining to AUS surgery in specific high-risk groups such as men with spinal cord injury, revision cases, concurrent penile prosthesis implant, and female SUI. The discussion of each category includes a brief review of surgical challenge and a practical action-based set of recommendations. Our increased understandings of the pathophysiology of various SUI cases coupled with effective therapeutic strategies to enhance AUS surgery continue to improve clinical outcomes of many patients with SUI.


Subject(s)
Female , Humans , Male , Erectile Dysfunction/surgery , Penile Implantation , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Reoperation , Spinal Cord Injuries/complications , Urinary Bladder, Neurogenic/surgery , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
6.
Asian Journal of Andrology ; (6): 60-63, 2020.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1009774

ABSTRACT

The use of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence has become more prevalent, especially in the "prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-era", when more patients are treated for localized prostate cancer. The first widely accepted device was the AMS 800, but since then, other devices have also entered the market. While efficacy has increased with improvements in technology and technique, and patient satisfaction is high, AUS implantation still has inherent risks and complications of any implant surgery, in addition to the unique challenges of urethral complications that may be associated with the cuff. Furthermore, the unique nature of the AUS, with a control pump, reservoir, balloon cuff, and connecting tubing, means that mechanical complications can also arise from these individual parts. This article aims to present and summarize the current literature on the management of complications of AUS, especially urethral atrophy. We conducted a literature search on PubMed from January 1990 to December 2018 on AUS complications and their management. We review the various potential complications and their management. AUS complications are either mechanical or nonmechanical complications. Mechanical complications usually involve malfunction of the AUS. Nonmechanical complications include infection, urethral atrophy, cuff erosion, and stricture. Challenges exist especially in the management of urethral atrophy, with both tandem implants, transcorporal cuffs, and cuff downsizing all postulated as potential remedies. Although complications from AUS implants are not common, knowledge of the management of these issues are crucial to ensure care for patients with these implants. Further studies are needed to further evaluate these techniques.


Subject(s)
Humans , Atrophy , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Prosthesis Failure , Prosthesis Implantation , Prosthesis-Related Infections/therapy , Urethra/pathology , Urethral Diseases/therapy , Urethral Stricture/surgery , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
7.
Asian Journal of Andrology ; (6): 20-27, 2020.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1009772

ABSTRACT

The field of prosthetic urology demonstrates the striking impact that simple devices can have on quality of life. Penile prosthesis and artificial urinary sphincter implantation are the cornerstone procedures on which this specialty focuses. Modern research largely concentrates on decreasing the rates of complication and infection, as the current devices offer superior rates of satisfaction when revision is not necessary. These techniques are also able to salvage sexual function and continence in more difficult patient populations including female-to-male transgender individuals, those with ischemic priapism, and those with erectile dysfunction and incontinence secondary to prostatectomy. This review summarizes modern techniques, outcomes, and complications in the field of prosthetic urology.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Erectile Dysfunction/surgery , Penile Implantation/methods , Penile Prosthesis , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Prosthesis Failure , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Prosthesis-Related Infections/epidemiology , Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology , Urethra/injuries , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Urinary Retention/epidemiology , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial , Urology
8.
Asian Journal of Andrology ; (6): 70-75, 2020.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1009771

ABSTRACT

Since their popularization, genitourinary prosthetics have remained a gold-standard therapy for the treatment of erectile dysfunction and stress urinary incontinence and in cases of testicular loss or dysfunction. They have also represented an area of significant innovation, which has contributed to excellent long-term outcomes. Given this history, the objective of the current review was to provide a 5-10-year outlook on anticipated trends and developments in the field of genitourinary prosthetics. To accomplish this objective, a PubMed and patent search was performed of topics relating to penile and testicular prostheses and urinary sphincters. In regard to penile prostheses, findings demonstrated several new concepts including temperature-sensitive alloys, automated pumps, devices designed specifically for neophalluses, and improved malleable designs. With artificial urinary sphincters, new concepts include the ability to add or remove fluid from an existing system, two-piece systems, and new mechanisms to occlude the urethra. For testicular prosthetics, future implementations may not only better replicate the feel of a biological testicle but also add endocrinological functions. Beyond device innovation, the future of prosthetics is also one of expanding geographic boundaries, which necessitates variable cost modeling and regulatory considerations. Surgical trends are also changing, with a greater emphasis on nonnarcotic, postoperative pain control, outpatient surgeries, and adjunctive techniques to lengthen the penis and address concomitant stress incontinence, among others. Concomitant with device and surgical changes, future considerations also include a greater need for education and training, particularly given the rapid expansion of sexual medicine into developing nations.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Erectile Dysfunction/surgery , Penile Implantation , Penile Prosthesis/trends , Prostheses and Implants/trends , Prosthesis Design/trends , Prosthesis Implantation/trends , Testicular Diseases/surgery , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial/trends , Urologic Surgical Procedures, Male/trends
9.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 46(4): 632-639, 2020. tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1134196

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Aged , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/etiology , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome , Middle Aged
11.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 45(2): 354-360, Mar.-Apr. 2019. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1002190

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Objective: To propose a new way to objectively evaluate the external sphincter function prior to male sling surgery. Materials and Methods: We evaluated the pre-operative sphincter function throughout sphincter pressure at rest (SPAR) and sphincter pressure under contraction (SPUC) obtained throughout urethral profilometry profile (UPP) of 10 consecutive patients (age range, 54-79 years) treated with the retrourethral transobturator sling (RTS) for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) because of prostate surgery. The primary endpoint for surgery success rate was post-operative pad weight test. This was correlated to pre-operative pad test, RT, SPAR and SPUC. Post-operatively patients were classified as continent (no pad use) and those who still were incontinent. Results: Mean SPUC in the continent and incontinent group was respectively 188 + 8.8 (median 185.1, range 181 to 201) and 96.9 + 49.4 (median 109.9, range 35.6 to 163.6) (P = 0.008). Mean 24-hour pad test was 151 + 84.2gm (median 140, range 80 to 245) and 973 + 337.1gm (median 1940, range 550 to 1200) in post-operative continent and incontinent groups respectively (P = 0.008). The repositioning test (RT) was positive in all continent patients except one. The RT was also positive in three incontinence patients (false positive). In all post-operative continent patients SPUC was higher than 180cmH2O and pre-operative pad test was less than 245gm. Conclusions: SPUC seems to be a way for optimizing the sphincter evaluation as well to become a useful tool for patient selection prior to RTS surgery.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Aged , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/etiology , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial/adverse effects , Esophageal Sphincter, Lower/physiology , Suburethral Slings/adverse effects , Postoperative Period , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Follow-Up Studies , Middle Aged
12.
International Neurourology Journal ; : 185-194, 2019.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-764125

ABSTRACT

The management of postprostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) is still challenging for urologists. In recent decades, various kinds of male sling system have been developed and introduced; however, they have not yet shown as good a result as that of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). However, a male sling is still in an important position because patients have a high demand for sling implantation, and it can allow the avoidance of the use of mechanical devices like AUS. Recently, the male sling has been widely used in mild-to-moderate PPI patients; however, there are no studies that compare individual devices. Thus, it is hard to directly compare the success rate of operation, and it is impossible to judge which sling system is more excellent. It is expected that many sling options will be available in addition to AUS in the near future with the technological development of various male slings and the accumulation of long-term surgical outcomes. In that in patients with PPI, sling implantation is an option that must be explained rather than an option that need not be explained to them, this review would share the latest outcomes and complications.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatectomy , Suburethral Slings , Urinary Incontinence , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
13.
International Neurourology Journal ; : 219-225, 2019.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-764121

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The aim was to study the correlation between cuff size and outcome after implantation of an AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter. METHODS: A total of 473 male patients with an AMS 800 sphincter implanted between 2012 and 2014 were analyzed in a retrospective multicenter cohort study performed as part of the Central European Debates on Male Incontinence (DOMINO) Project. RESULTS: Single cuffs were implanted in 54.5% and double cuffs in 45.5% of the patients. The cuffs used had a median circumference of 4.5 cm. Within a median follow of 18 months, urethral erosion occurred in 12.8% of the cases and was associated significantly more often with small cuff sizes (P<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that, apart from cuff size (P=0.03), prior irradiation (P<0.001) and the penoscrotal approach (P=0.036) were associated with an increased erosion rate. Continence rate tended to be highest with median cuff sizes (4–5.5 cm). CONCLUSIONS: Apart from irradiation and the penoscrotal approach, small cuff size is a risk factor for urethral erosion. Results are best with cuff sizes of 4.5–5.5 cm.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Cohort Studies , Multivariate Analysis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
14.
International Neurourology Journal ; : 265-276, 2019.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-785855

ABSTRACT

Male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) can undoubtedly reduce quality of life and promote personal distress and psychosocial alienation. The frequency of postprostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) counts on the characterization of urinary incontinence and the periods of patient follow-up. Operational therapeutics, for instance, urethral male slings and artificial urinary sphincters, are well-chosen as adequate and secure surgeries for male SUI in men with continual PPI when conservative treatment is ineffective. Over the former 2 decades, surgery has progressed regarding both operative approach and sling architecture. However, there are no guidelines about when surgery should be carried out and which is the most appropriate surgical option. In this review, we summarize recent advances in implantable devices for PPI and also discuss traditional surgical care. When we are planning the male PPI surgery, careful preoperative work-up should be performed and surgical method should be chosen according to the severity of the disease. Male sling is preferred in mild and moderate symptomatic patients with normal detrusor pressure and it is recommended to select traditional artificial urinary sphincter device in those with severe symptoms. It is expected that effective devices without adverse events will be developed with technical advances in near future.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Emigrants and Immigrants , Follow-Up Studies , Methods , Prostatectomy , Quality of Life , Suburethral Slings , Urinary Incontinence , Urinary Incontinence, Stress , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
15.
urol. colomb. (Bogotá. En línea) ; 28(2): 100-105, 2019. ilus
Article in Spanish | LILACS, COLNAL | ID: biblio-1402310

ABSTRACT

La prevalencia de incontinencia urinaria de esfuerzo (IUE) post-prostatectomía varía entre el 4% y el 50%, siendo más frecuente en pacientes que son llevados a prostatectomía radical. Es una condición que afecta la calidad de vida de los pacientes y presenta un impacto de grado variable de severidad. Existen diferentes opciones para el tratamiento de esa entidad, dentro de los cuales se encuentran: terapia de piso pélvico con biofeedback, fisioterapia, sistemas recolectores de orina, clamps peneanos, inyecciones periuretrales de materiales abultantes, esfínter urinario artificial (EUA) y cintas pubouretrales.[1] [2] El gold standard para la IUE es el EUA con tasa de éxito entre 50%­80%, no obstante, con una tasa de explante de hasta el 33%. Se han desarrollado otras alternativas con cintas pubouretrales las cuales han reportado una tasa de éxito hasta del 83%.[2] La principal limitante de esas alternativas en el manejo de la IUE, ha sido la necesidad de reajustar esos dispositivos con procedimientos quirúrgicos, exponiendo en repetidas ocasiones a los pacientes a los riesgos de anestesia y del procedimiento quirúrgico, situación que se ha tratado de mejorar con el dispositivo ATOMS®, introducido en Europa desde marzo del 2009, el cual ofrece la oportunidad de realizar tales ajustes en el consultorio.[3] La indicación para la colocación del ATOMS® es la IUE, sin tener claridad en su severidad, hasta en un 92,9% de las ocasiones, y usualmente son pacientes con antecedente de cirugías previas anti-incontinencia fallidas (34,3%). El tiempo quirúrgico promedio es de 47 minutos, entre 29 minutos a 112 minutos.[1]


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatectomy , Surgical Procedures, Operative , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial , Pelvic Floor , Audiovisual Aids , Urinary Incontinence , Urinary Incontinence, Stress , Biofeedback, Psychology , Physical Therapy Modalities
16.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 44(6): 1215-1223, Nov.-Dec. 2018. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-975663

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Purpose: The objective of the present study is to test the efficiency and practicality of a new artificial sphincter "BR - SL - AS - 904" in the control of urinary incontinence in post - PR patients and to evaluate their complications. Patients and Methods: Fifteen patients with incontinence after one year of radical prostatectomy were included prospectively. All patients underwent artificial urethral sphincter (AUS) implant "BR - SL - AS - 904" according to established technique. Independent variables such as free urinary flow, PAD weight test, ICIQ - SF score and urinary symptoms through the IPSS score were compared in different follow-up moments. Results: Patients submitted to AUS implantation did not present trans - operative or post - operative complications related to the surgical act such as: infection, hematoma, erosion or urinary retention. Device was inert to the body during the follow-up, showing an excellent adaptation of the patients, besides the easy handling. The mean age was 68.20 years 40% of the patients had systemic arterial hypertension, 6.7% diabetes mellitus, 6.7% were hypertensive and diabetic, 13.4% were hypertensive, had diabetes and hypercholesterolemia and 26.7% patients had no comorbidities. It was evidenced that the urinary flow peak during the follow-up remained stable. Decreased averages and median PAD weight test were 135.19 to 75.72 and 106.00 to 23.50, respectively. The IPSS score decreased and the quality of life increased (12.33 to 3.40 and 2.50 to 3.20 respectively). The ICQF - SF questionnaire score also showed a decrease, ranging from 16, 71 to 7.33. Conclusion: The artificial sphincter implant "BR - SL - AS 904" was reproducible, safe and effective in the control of urinary incontinence in post - PR patients.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Aged , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Urinary Incontinence/surgery , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Quality of Life , Urinary Incontinence/etiology , Case-Control Studies , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
17.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 44(3): 634-638, May-June 2018. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-954035

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Case Hypothesis: Surgical removal is the standard treatment for artificial sphincter extrusion. However in some specific situations is possible to maintain the prosthesis with good results. Case report: We report a 60 years old patient presenting sphincter pump extrusion one month after artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) AMS 800™ placement for treating post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PRPUI). He also had a penile pros- thesis implant one year before that was replaced in the same surgery the sphincter was implanted. As patient refused sphincter removal and there were no signals of active infection he was treated by extensive surgical washing with antibiotics and antiseptics. Pump was repositioned in the opposite side of the scrotum. Patient had good evolution with sphincter activation 50 days later. After 10 months of follow up, patient is socially continent and having regular sexual intercourse. Savage surgery may be an option in select cases of artificial sphincter extrusion. Promising future implications: Like in some patients with penile prosthesis some pa- tients with artificial sphincter extrusion can be treated without removing the device. This may be a line of research about conservative treatment of artificial sphincter complications.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Postoperative Complications/surgery , Prosthesis Failure , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial/adverse effects , Salvage Therapy/methods , Urinary Incontinence/surgery , Reproducibility of Results , Treatment Outcome , Middle Aged
18.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 44(2): 355-361, Mar.-Apr. 2018. graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-892977

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Purpose We present a novel AUS implantation technique using a single perineal incision for single device placement or in combination with an inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Urinary and sexual dysfunction following the management of prostate cancer has a significant impact on the quality of life of our patients. While there are marginal changes in the prosthetic devices, we strive to reduce post-operative morbidity while maximizing efficacy. Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 6 patients who underwent single perineal incision placement of a virgin AUS in 2014, 3 with simultaneous IPP placement. In all cases, the pressure regulating balloons (PRB) were placed in a high sub-muscular ectopic position and the pumps were placed into a sub-dartos pouch through the perineal incision, which was also validated using a cadaveric model. Results The mean patient age was 61 (SD, 7.5 years) with mean body mass index of 31 (SD, 5.9). The average pre-operative pad usage was 7.7 (SD 1.63) pads per day. The mean follow-up was 13.9 months (SD 9.45). Four out of the six patients reported utilizing ≤1 pad daily at follow-up. The one patient who was not initially dry required downsizing of his cuff to 3.5cm; the remaining patient was lost to follow-up. There were no identifiable perioperative or post-operative complications. Conclusions We present our initial report of using a single perineal incision for AUS implantation with a validated sub-dartos pump location, which is safe and effective for implantation of an AUS as a single or double implantation in well-selected patients.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Urinary Incontinence, Stress/surgery , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Cadaver , Feasibility Studies , Retrospective Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Treatment Outcome , Penile Implantation/methods , Middle Aged
19.
Int. braz. j. urol ; 44(1): 114-120, Jan.-Feb. 2018. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-892954

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Objectives Report the long-term outcomes of the AMS 800 artificial sphincer (AS) for the treatment post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) in a single center in Brazil. Materials and Methods Clinical data from patients who underwent the procedure were retrieved from the medical records of individuals with more than 1 year of follow-up from May 2001 to January 2016. Continence status (number of pads that was used), complications (erosion or extrusion, urethral atrophy, and infection), malfunctions, and need for secondary implantation were evaluated. The relationship between complications and prior or subsequent radiation therapy (RT) was also examined. Results From May 2001 to January 2016, 121 consecutive patients underwent AS implantation for PPI at an oncological referral center in Brazil. At the last visit, the AS remained implanted in 106 patients (87.6%), who reported adequate continence status (maximum of 1 pad/day). Eight-two subjects (67.8%) claimed not to be using pads on a regular basis at the final visit (completely dry). Revision occurred in 24 patients (19.8%). Radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer following radical prostatectomy was used in 47 patients before or after AS placement. Twelve patients with a history of RT had urethral erosion compared with 3 men without RT (p=0.004). Conclusion Considering our outcomes, we conclude that AS implantation yields satisfactory results for the treatment of PPI and should remain the standard procedure for these patients. Radiation therapy is a risk factor for complication.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Urinary Incontinence/therapy , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial , Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Radiotherapy Dosage , Urethra/surgery , Urinary Incontinence/etiology , Urodynamics , Brazil , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
20.
Anesthesia and Pain Medicine ; : 180-183, 2018.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-714058

ABSTRACT

A 72-year-old man underwent spinal anesthesia for artificial urinary sphincter placement for urinary incontinence. After the block level was confirmed below T6, 1 g of cefotetan, which had not shown any reaction on skin test, was administered as a prophylactic antibiotic. The patient began complaining of chest discomfort and dyspnea shortly after injection. ST elevation appeared on the electrocardiogram and the patient's pulse could not be palpated. Accordingly, cardiopulmonary resuscitation was performed for 5 minutes; the patient recovered spontaneous circulation. The patient was diagnosed as experienced coronary artery spasm by coronary angiography with spasm test. Because coronary artery spasm can also develop in patients with no history of coronary artery disease and under spinal anesthesia, careful observation, suspicion of coronary artery spasm and prompt response to hemodynamic and electrocardiogram changes are necessary.


Subject(s)
Aged , Humans , Anesthesia, Conduction , Anesthesia, Spinal , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Cefotetan , Coronary Angiography , Coronary Artery Disease , Coronary Vasospasm , Coronary Vessels , Dyspnea , Electrocardiography , Heart Arrest , Hemodynamics , Skin Tests , Spasm , Thorax , Urinary Incontinence , Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL