Artificial urinary sphincter and stricture disease: surgical principles in management

Iatrogenic stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is the most common complication of surgical treatment of prostate cancer, regardless of operative approach, and has a major impact on patients' quality of life. Although SUI can occur after surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia, specifically transurethral prostate resection, laser enucleation of the prostate, and simple open prostatectomy, these therapeutic modalities play a much less significant role in the etiology of SUI. Artificial urethral sphincter (AUS) implantation is considered the standard treatment modality providing high success rates, including durable efficacy, and optimal patient satisfaction for moderate to severe urinary incontinence resulting mainly from radical prostatectomy. However, although complication rates are generally acceptably low, revision and/or explantation may be required due to mechanical failure and non-mechanical problems, specifically urethral atrophy/cuff deficient occlusion, infection, and cuff erosion. Several risk factors for AUS failure associated with a fragile, compromised urethra have been identified and these play a critical role in device cuff erosion and subsequent removal of the device. Among others, apparently the most impacting factors are irradiation, urethral stent placement, a previous AUS placement, and importantly presence of urethral stricture or prior urethroplasty. Generally, any clinical situation leading to a diseased urethra or lack of urethral integrity is associated with impaired local blood perfusion, and consequently lower success rates. The present review aims to evaluate the impact of the presence of prior urethral strictures and urethroplasty on the outcomes of AUS implantation on one hand, and vice-versa, the influence of AUS placement on later urethral stricture surgery, particularly following cuff erosion.