Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 13, 2025
Transcorporal Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff Placement in a Case Requiring Revision for Urethral Atrophy
Published on: June 16, 2022
Artificial urinary sphincter significantly better than fixed sling for moderate post-prostatectomy stress urinary
Emilio Sacco1, Carlo Gandi1, Filippo Marino1
1"Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS", Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Objective:
To compare the efficacy of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) vs retrourethral transobturator sling (RTS) in men with moderate post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) using propensity score-matching analysis to enhance the validity of the comparison (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
Patients And Methods:
Consecutive men with moderate (3-5 pads/day) stress-prevalent PPI were included if implanted with a RTS (TiLOOP® Male; pfm medical, Köln, Germany) or AUS (AMS800® ; Boston Scientific, Boston, MA, USA) since July 2011 to December 2017 and with ≥12 months of follow-up. Preoperative assessment included 24-h pad usage, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF), urethrocystoscopy, and urodynamics if indicated. Propensity score-matching analysis was based on age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, pad usage, previous radiotherapy, and urethrotomy. The primary outcome was at least 'much improved' response at 12-months according to the Patient Global Impression of Improvement questionnaire, without additional PPI surgery or prosthesis explantation.
Results:
Of 109 included patients, 70 patients were matched and the study groups were well balanced for the baseline matched variables. The median baseline 24-h pad usage was four in both groups (P = 0.10), and median follow-up was 51.2 months for AUS and 47.2 months (P = 0.5) for RTS patients. In the AUS and RTS cohorts, respectively, 33 (94.3%) and 24 (68.6%) patients achieved the primary outcome (P < 0.001), the 0-1 pad/day rates was 94.3% vs 68.6% (P = 0.012) at 12 months, and 91.4% vs 68.6% (P = 0.034) at last follow-up. At the last follow-up, the median 24-h leakage volumes, median ICIQ-SF scores and satisfaction rates were 0 vs 15 mL (P = 0.017), 4 vs 10 (P = 0.001), and 94.3% vs 68.6% (P = 0.012) in the AUS and RTS cohorts, respectively. There were no significant differences in overall rates of complications and re-interventions, although Clavien-Dindo Grade III complications (n = 3) occurred only in the AUS group. At sensitivity analysis, the study was reasonably robust to hidden bias.
Conclusion:
We found that AUS implantation significantly outperformed RTS in patients with moderate PPI for both subjective and objective outcomes.
