Long-term follow-up for the treatment of male urinary incontinence with the Remeex system

Navalón-Monllor, V.; Ordoño-Domínguez, F.; Pallás-Costa, Y.; Vilar-Castro, L.A.; Monllor-Peidro, M.E.; Juan-Escudero, J.U.; Navalón-Verdejo, P.

doi:10.1016/j.acuroe.2016.09.001

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The reported dry rate in patients with mild to moderate SUI appeared comparable to the Argus sling with results up to 65% (20,21). However, readjustment of Remeex sling is common and up to 90% of patients require at least two adjustments to achieve complete urinary continence.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 63%

Contemporary surgical devices for male stress urinary incontinence: a review of technological advances in current continence surgery

Chung¹

2017

Transl. Androl. Urol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) remains a debilitating condition that adversely impacts all domains of quality of life and is associated with significant social stigma and health economic burden. The incidence of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) depends on the definition of urinary incontinence and the length of patient follow up. In patients with persistent PPI following failure of conservative measures, surgical treatment is recommended although there is no published guideline on when surgery should be performed, and what the best surgical option is. Male slings (MS) can be divided into adjustable or non-adjustable types, and offers an attractive option for patients who wish to avoid mechanical handling during urinary voiding. Published intermediate data supports good safety and efficacy rate in men with mild to moderate degree of SUI. The AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) remains the standard of treatment for complete continence and has the longest efficacy and safety records. Other AUS-like devices are designed to address current AMS 800 limitations but themselves are fraught with their own issues.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 63%

Contemporary surgical devices for male stress urinary incontinence: a review of technological advances in current continence surgery

Chung¹

2017

Transl. Androl. Urol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A total of 456 articles were retrieved using the search strategies, 56 complete texts were reviewed, and 7 studies were ultimately included in the analysis 6,11–16 (Figure 1)…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A total of 420 patients with SUI PP received interventions, including 107 patients who received an adjustable sling and 313 who received an AUS. A total of 29 patients received the Argus T adjustable system, 11 36 patients received the Remeex system, 6,13 and 22 patients received the ATOMS adjustable sling. 14 In three studies, 313 patients received an AUS.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We found a high risk of bias in all of the studies for the sample size calculation, which was not reported. No comparison group was included in the studies by Navalón-Monllor and colleagues, 13 O’Connor and colleagues, 12 and Perez, 16 while a low risk of bias was determined for most of the remaining parameters in the nonrandomized studies (Figure 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effectiveness of surgical management with an adjustable sling versus an artificial urinary sphincter in patients with severe urinary postprostatectomy incontinence: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Bomba

Flórez

García

et al. 2019

Therapeutic Advances in Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of an adjustable sling compared with an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in patients with severe urinary incontinence (SUI) postprostatectomy (PP). Methods: This review was carried out following the Cochrane Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) declaration. We searched Medline, Embase, LILACS, and CENTRAL databases. Studies with patients older than 18 years of age with SUI PP who underwent sling or AUS intervention and had been monitored for longer than 12 months were included. Results: Seven studies were included, yielding a sample size of 420. Pads were reportedly dry or improved in 70% of the sling group compared with 74% in the AUS group. The Incontinence Impact Questionnaire, Short Form (IIQ-7) was the most frequently used scale and showed improvement, with a score of 82.8% in the AUS group compared with 86.1% in the sling group. When comparing interventions with nonintervention, relative risks (RRs) of 35.37 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.17–174.35) and 45.14 (95% CI: 11.09–183.70) were found for the adjustable sling and AUS, respectively, which were statistically significant. No significant differences were found when AUS versus adjustable sling were compared, with an RR of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.09–6.56). We found a low risk of bias in most studies. Conclusions: Both interventions can reduce incontinence and improve the quality of life of patients with SUI PP. The published literature is substantially limited as no randomized clinical trials are available, no consensus has been reached regarding the definition of severity of incontinence, and considerable heterogeneity exists across the outcome variables measured.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, rearrangement of the Remeex sling is prevalent, and as far as 90% of men need minimally 2 adjustments to attain thorough urinary continence. From a study published in 2016, authors evaluated 24 men with PPI and an implanted Remeex sling, the average number of adjustments was 2.41 ±1.52 during long-term follow-up [23]. Recent clinical outcomes from a French study revealed that 9 patients (36%) were recovered completely, and 9 (36%) were considerably improved, although 7 patients (28%) showed no major recovery, at the final follow-up date (mean, 31 months) [24].…”

Section: Remeex Sling (Neomedic)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial Urinary Sphincter for Postradical Prostatectomy Urinary Incontinence — Is It the Best Option?

Yoo

2019

Int Neurourol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) can undoubtedly reduce quality of life and promote personal distress and psychosocial alienation. The frequency of postprostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) counts on the characterization of urinary incontinence and the periods of patient follow-up. Operational therapeutics, for instance, urethral male slings and artificial urinary sphincters, are well-chosen as adequate and secure surgeries for male SUI in men with continual PPI when conservative treatment is ineffective. Over the former 2 decades, surgery has progressed regarding both operative approach and sling architecture. However, there are no guidelines about when surgery should be carried out and which is the most appropriate surgical option. In this review, we summarize recent advances in implantable devices for PPI and also discuss traditional surgical care. When we are planning the male PPI surgery, careful preoperative work-up should be performed and surgical method should be chosen according to the severity of the disease. Male sling is preferred in mild and moderate symptomatic patients with normal detrusor pressure and it is recommended to select traditional artificial urinary sphincter device in those with severe symptoms. It is expected that effective devices without adverse events will be developed with technical advances in near future.

show abstract

Long-term follow-up for the treatment of male urinary incontinence with the Remeex system

Cited by 10 publications

References 14 publications

Contemporary surgical devices for male stress urinary incontinence: a review of technological advances in current continence surgery

Contemporary surgical devices for male stress urinary incontinence: a review of technological advances in current continence surgery

Effectiveness of surgical management with an adjustable sling versus an artificial urinary sphincter in patients with severe urinary postprostatectomy incontinence: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Artificial Urinary Sphincter for Postradical Prostatectomy Urinary Incontinence — Is It the Best Option?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About