Indications for revision of artificial urinary sphincter and modifiable risk factors for device-related morbidity

Ifeanyichukwu I. Anusionwu, Edward James Wright

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aims The aim of the study is to evaluate the causes for artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) failure in a contemporary series, and to detect modifiable risk factors for device-related complications. The aim is to also report outcome after AUS revision. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent AUS revision at a tertiary care institution by a single surgeon from 2006 to 2011. There were 53 AUS revisions performed on 34 patients at a median age of 69 years. Results Urethral atrophy was the most common indication for revision. Fourteen patients (41%) underwent more than one revision. Seven patients had urethral catheterization in the setting of an active AUS while admitted to a non-urologic service; these patients all developed cuff erosion. Fifty-four percent of urethral erosions were associated with such traumatic catheterizations. After revision, 80% of patients with an AUS in place were using one or no pad daily at mean follow up of 27 months. Conclusion Urethral atrophy remains the most common reason for AUS revision. More than half of all urethral erosions are secondary to urethral catheterization in the setting of an active sphincter, suggesting that some of the risk of device-related morbidity may be modifiable. Neurourol. Urodynam. 32: 63-65, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)63-65
Number of pages3
JournalNeurourology and Urodynamics
Volume32
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2013

Fingerprint

Artificial Urinary Sphincter
Morbidity
Equipment and Supplies
Urinary Catheterization
Atrophy
Tertiary Healthcare
Catheterization
Medical Records

Keywords

  • artificial urinary sphincter
  • incontinence
  • morbidity
  • outcome
  • revision

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Urology

Cite this

Indications for revision of artificial urinary sphincter and modifiable risk factors for device-related morbidity. / Anusionwu, Ifeanyichukwu I.; Wright, Edward James.

In: Neurourology and Urodynamics, Vol. 32, No. 1, 01.2013, p. 63-65.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9c2d4da92a3d4a4f98449b030ee5edff,
title = "Indications for revision of artificial urinary sphincter and modifiable risk factors for device-related morbidity",
abstract = "Aims The aim of the study is to evaluate the causes for artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) failure in a contemporary series, and to detect modifiable risk factors for device-related complications. The aim is to also report outcome after AUS revision. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent AUS revision at a tertiary care institution by a single surgeon from 2006 to 2011. There were 53 AUS revisions performed on 34 patients at a median age of 69 years. Results Urethral atrophy was the most common indication for revision. Fourteen patients (41{\%}) underwent more than one revision. Seven patients had urethral catheterization in the setting of an active AUS while admitted to a non-urologic service; these patients all developed cuff erosion. Fifty-four percent of urethral erosions were associated with such traumatic catheterizations. After revision, 80{\%} of patients with an AUS in place were using one or no pad daily at mean follow up of 27 months. Conclusion Urethral atrophy remains the most common reason for AUS revision. More than half of all urethral erosions are secondary to urethral catheterization in the setting of an active sphincter, suggesting that some of the risk of device-related morbidity may be modifiable. Neurourol. Urodynam. 32: 63-65, 2013. {\circledC} 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.",
keywords = "artificial urinary sphincter, incontinence, morbidity, outcome, revision",
author = "Anusionwu, {Ifeanyichukwu I.} and Wright, {Edward James}",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1002/nau.22263",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "63--65",
journal = "Neurourology and Urodynamics",
issn = "0733-2467",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Indications for revision of artificial urinary sphincter and modifiable risk factors for device-related morbidity

AU - Anusionwu, Ifeanyichukwu I.

AU - Wright, Edward James

PY - 2013/1

Y1 - 2013/1

N2 - Aims The aim of the study is to evaluate the causes for artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) failure in a contemporary series, and to detect modifiable risk factors for device-related complications. The aim is to also report outcome after AUS revision. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent AUS revision at a tertiary care institution by a single surgeon from 2006 to 2011. There were 53 AUS revisions performed on 34 patients at a median age of 69 years. Results Urethral atrophy was the most common indication for revision. Fourteen patients (41%) underwent more than one revision. Seven patients had urethral catheterization in the setting of an active AUS while admitted to a non-urologic service; these patients all developed cuff erosion. Fifty-four percent of urethral erosions were associated with such traumatic catheterizations. After revision, 80% of patients with an AUS in place were using one or no pad daily at mean follow up of 27 months. Conclusion Urethral atrophy remains the most common reason for AUS revision. More than half of all urethral erosions are secondary to urethral catheterization in the setting of an active sphincter, suggesting that some of the risk of device-related morbidity may be modifiable. Neurourol. Urodynam. 32: 63-65, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

AB - Aims The aim of the study is to evaluate the causes for artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) failure in a contemporary series, and to detect modifiable risk factors for device-related complications. The aim is to also report outcome after AUS revision. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent AUS revision at a tertiary care institution by a single surgeon from 2006 to 2011. There were 53 AUS revisions performed on 34 patients at a median age of 69 years. Results Urethral atrophy was the most common indication for revision. Fourteen patients (41%) underwent more than one revision. Seven patients had urethral catheterization in the setting of an active AUS while admitted to a non-urologic service; these patients all developed cuff erosion. Fifty-four percent of urethral erosions were associated with such traumatic catheterizations. After revision, 80% of patients with an AUS in place were using one or no pad daily at mean follow up of 27 months. Conclusion Urethral atrophy remains the most common reason for AUS revision. More than half of all urethral erosions are secondary to urethral catheterization in the setting of an active sphincter, suggesting that some of the risk of device-related morbidity may be modifiable. Neurourol. Urodynam. 32: 63-65, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

KW - artificial urinary sphincter

KW - incontinence

KW - morbidity

KW - outcome

KW - revision

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871396768&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84871396768&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/nau.22263

DO - 10.1002/nau.22263

M3 - Article

C2 - 22693077

AN - SCOPUS:84871396768

VL - 32

SP - 63

EP - 65

JO - Neurourology and Urodynamics

JF - Neurourology and Urodynamics

SN - 0733-2467

IS - 1

ER -