Urinary incontinence in men

Bauer, Ricarda M.; Oelke, Matthias; Hübner, W.; Grabbert, Markus; Kirschner‐Hermanns, Ruth; Anding, Ralf

doi:10.1007/s00120-015-3826-z

Cited by 18 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most frequent cause for male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is iatrogenic sphincter destabilisation by radical prostatectomy [1] . The standard procedure for the treatment of male SUI is still the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) [2] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Factors for Failure of Male Slings and Artificial Urinary Sphincters: Results from a Large Middle European Cohort Study

Hüsch

Kretschmer²,

Thomsen³

et al. 2016

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: We analysed the impact of predefined risk factors: age, diabetes, history of pelvic irradiation, prior surgery for stress urinary incontinence (SUI), prior urethral stricture, additional procedure during SUI surgery, duration of incontinence, ASA-classification and cause for incontinence on failure and complications in male SUI surgery. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively identified 506 patients with an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and 513 patients with a male sling (MS) in a multicenter cohort study. Complication rates were correlated to the risk factors in univariate analysis. Subsequently, a multivariate logistic regression adjusted to the risk factors was performed. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A history of pelvic irradiation was an independent risk factor for explantation in AUS (p < 0.001) and MS (p = 0.018). Moreover, prior urethral stricture (p = 0.036) and higher ASA-classification (p = 0.039) were positively correlated with explantation in univariate analysis for AUS. Urethral erosion was correlated with prior urethral stricture (p < 0.001) and a history of pelvic irradiation (p < 0.001) in AUS. Furthermore, infection was correlated with additional procedures during SUI surgery in univariate analysis (p = 0.037) in MS. Conclusions: We first identified the correlation of higher ASA-classification and explantation in AUS. Nevertheless, only a few novel risk factors had a significant influence on the failure of MS or AUS.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Factors for Failure of Male Slings and Artificial Urinary Sphincters: Results from a Large Middle European Cohort Study

Hüsch

Kretschmer²,

Thomsen³

et al. 2016

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The differentiation between muscular weakness and hypermobility has also gained importance in men. The use of retrourethral functional slings addresses the hypermobile sphincter in particular [ 29 , 30 ].…”

Section: Stress Urinary Incontinence—diagnostics and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Surgical therapy options are only used when conservative options are exhausted. In particular, after radical prostatectomy, incontinence operations including bulking agents, band systems, periurethral balance, and artificial sphincters should be indicated after 12 months at the earliest [ 30 ]. For many years, the artificial sphincter has been the gold standard of therapy for stress urinary incontinence (see below) [ 87 ].…”

Section: Surgical Treatment Of Stress Urinary Incontinencementioning

confidence: 99%

Stress Urinary Incontinence: An Unsolved Clinical Challenge

Harland,

Walz,

Eberli

et al. 2023

Biomedicines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stress urinary incontinence is still a frequent problem for women and men, which leads to pronounced impairment of the quality of life and withdrawal from the social environment. Modern diagnostics and therapy improved the situation for individuals affected. But there are still limits, including the correct diagnosis of incontinence and its pathophysiology, as well as the therapeutic algorithms. In most cases, patients are treated with a first-line regimen of drugs, possibly in combination with specific exercises and electrophysiological stimulation. When conservative options are exhausted, minimally invasive surgical therapies are indicated. However, standard surgeries, especially the application of implants, do not pursue any causal therapy. Non-absorbable meshes and ligaments have fallen into disrepute due to complications. In numerous countries, classic techniques such as colposuspension have been revived to avoid implants. Except for tapes in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women, the literature on randomized controlled studies is insufficient. This review provides an update on pharmacological and surgical treatment options for stress urinary incontinence; it highlights limitations and formulates wishes for the future from a clinical perspective.

show abstract

“…However, minimal-invasive and innovative alternatives have been developed [1,2]. In particular, various fixed and adjustable male slings (MS) have been designed and approved for use in clinical application during the last decade [1][2][3]. The predominant indication for fixed MS is mild to moderate male SUI [4,5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The TiLOOP® Male Sling: Did We Forejudge

Hüsch

Kretschmer²,

Thomsen³

et al. 2017

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TiLOOP® male sling (pfm medical, Cologne, Germany) used in the treatment for male stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Material and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated a total of 34 patients with a TiLOOP® male sling. Perioperative complication rates were assessed and validated questionnaires were prospectively evaluated to assess quality of life and satisfaction rate. Outcome and complication rates were analysed by using descriptive statistics. Correlation of continence outcome and risk factors was performed with the chi-square test. A p value below 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The majority of patients (70.6%) were diagnosed with mild or moderate male SUI. During surgery, one instance (2.9%) of intraoperative urethral injury was observed. There were no immediate postoperative complications. The mean follow-up time was 44.6 months. An improvement of male SUI was reported by 61.9% of the patients and 38.1% reported no change according the Patient Global Impression of Improvement. The mean perineal pain score was 0.5 according to the international index of pain. Conclusions: The TiLOOP® is a safe treatment option for male SUI in our cohort with a low complication rate. However, the functional outcome of the TiLOOP® was inferior when compared to the outcome of the AdVance® male sling.

show abstract

Urinary incontinence in men

Cited by 18 publications

References 51 publications

Risk Factors for Failure of Male Slings and Artificial Urinary Sphincters: Results from a Large Middle European Cohort Study

Risk Factors for Failure of Male Slings and Artificial Urinary Sphincters: Results from a Large Middle European Cohort Study

Stress Urinary Incontinence: An Unsolved Clinical Challenge

The TiLOOP® Male Sling: Did We Forejudge

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About