Editorial Comment: A Contemporary Analysis of Dual Inflatable Penile Prosthesis and Artificial Urinary Sphincter Outcomes

Abstract

and Research Cooperative) database for men who underwent inflatable penile prosthesis and/or artificial urinary sphincter insertion between 2000 and 2014. Compared with men who received a penile prosthesis alone those with a penile prosthesis and an artificial urinary sphincter (not necessarily done at the same surgery) had a higher likelihood of undergoing inflatable penile prosthesis reoperation at 1 year (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.32-3.27, p <0.01) and 3 years (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.69-3.99, p <0.01). The authors concluded that combined inflatable penile prosthesis and artificial urinary sphincter insertion portends a higher likelihood of inflatable penile prosthesis reoperation at 1 and 3 years. However, artificial urinary sphincter outcomes remain comparable. These data are in opposition to 2013 publication on Journal of Urology by Dr. Segal and cols. (1) retrospectively reviewed the records of 55 combined procedures that were performed from 2000 to 2011 and concluded that dual implantation (DI) was feasible without an increased risk of adverse outcomes compared to implantation of a single prosthesis. And also contradict a 2019 publication in Urology by Dr. Boysen and cols. (2) where, with the biggest number of cases (all over 65 years old), dual implantation does not adversely affect perioperative complications or device survival relative to placement of either device alone.

Implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy (current aspects)

“…По данным исследования V. Javaroni (2020) [33], ФПТ создавало меньший риск осложнений, нежели комбинированная операция, как через год (p <0,01), так и спустя 3 года (p <0,01). Однако результаты имплантации только ИМС остаются сопоставимыми с сочетанными вмешательствами.…”