Sistema REMEEX® para el tratamiento de la incontinencia de esfuerzo masculina: nuestra experiencia

Parra, J.D. Jiménez; Lostal, J.L. Cebrián; Alfaro, A. Hualde; Bandrés, Silvia Álvarez; García, David García; Varas, L. Torres; Calvo, J.M. Jiménez; Garibay, A.S. González de

doi:10.1016/j.acuro.2010.04.011

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Though the effectiveness of or results is similar to previous studies [ 6 , 12 , 13 , 14 ], in said studies, the rate of complete dry patients (0–1 safety pads) varies from 36%–64.7% compared to the 72.34% found in our study. This could be due to the fact that, as years go by, the technique of the surgical procedure has been further standardized, allowing for better results.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Our results show that our sample comprised male patients with a mean age of 69.76 years, which was also observed in previous studies where the mean age was between 67–70.4 years [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 12 , 13 , 14 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…The heterogenicity in the study population allowed us to determine the effectiveness of the Remeex ® system regardless of the severity of the SUI, as was done by Sousa-Escandón et al [ 6 ], Kim et al [ 13 ] and Leizour et al [ 14 ]. In total, 42 obtained complete dryness (use of 0–1 safety pads) or an improvement with the system (>50% reduction in the number of pads used), one of the highest success rates compared to previous studies [ 6 , 12 , 13 , 14 ] and surpassed only by those reported by Navalón et al in 2010 [ 7 ] and by Navalón-Monllor et al in 2016 [ 8 ]. It is worth highlighting that, in the aforementioned studies, all patients suffered from severe SUI, which makes our study the one to report the highest effectiveness to date in patients with SUI of any given severity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Remeex® System Effectiveness in Male Patients with Stress Urinary Incontinence

Márquez-Sánchez

Padilla-Fernández

Perán-Teruel³

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: When conservative management fails, patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) are considered for surgical treatment. Simpler, more economical and less invasive surgical techniques, such as the Remeex® system, have been developed. Objectives: To analyze the objective effectiveness of the Remeex® system in the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence. To study survival and complication rates of the Remeex® system in male SUI patients. Materials and methods: Prospective observational study between July 2015 and May 2020. Group A (n = 7; GA) patients with mild SUI. Group B (n = 22; GB) patients with moderate SUI. Group C (n = 18; GC) patients with severe SUI. Effectiveness was assessed by the number of patients achieving complete and partial dryness. Complete dryness was defined as patients using 0–1 safety pads per day; partial dryness as a >50% reduction in the number of pads used. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Student’s t-test. Chi2, Fisher’s exact test, ANOVA, and multivariate analysis. Significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: Mean age 69.76 years, mean follow-up 33.52 months. Objective effectiveness was observed in 89.36% of patients with incontinence. The effectiveness was 85.71% in GA, 90.91% in GB and 88.89% in GC. There were no significant differences among groups (p = 1.0000). 34.04% of patients with an implant required at least one readjustment, while 66.00% did not require any. There were no significant differences among groups (p = 0.113) Chi2 = 4.352. 95.74% of implants remained in place by the end of follow-up. We observed complications in 17.02% of patients. Conclusions: Remeex® system is an effective and safe method for male stress urinary incontinence treatment, regardless of the severity of the incontinence, with high survival and low complication and removal rates. System readjustments are required in one-third of the cases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Remeex® System Effectiveness in Male Patients with Stress Urinary Incontinence

Márquez-Sánchez

Padilla-Fernández

Perán-Teruel³

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The retropubic permanent suture passage was associated with a 10% bladder perforation rate, 6% infection/erosion, and 86% required at least 2 adjustment revisions. Findings were similar to Jimenez Parra et al [ 47 ], in their small series of 14 patients published in 2010, they reported a 21% explantation rate, 29% bladder perforation, and 36% urinary retention. At a mean follow-up of 18.6 months 42% of patients were totally continent and 33% reported light incontinence.…”

Section: Surgical Treatment Of Ppisupporting

confidence: 88%

The artificial urinary sphincter and male sling for postprostatectomy incontinence: Which patient should get which procedure?

Comiter

Dobberfuhl

2016

Investig Clin Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surgery is the most efficacious treatment for postprostatectomy incontinence. The ideal surgical approach depends on a variety of patient factors including history of prior incontinence surgery or radiation treatment, bladder contractility, severity of leakage, and patient expectations. Most patients choose to avoid a mechanical device, opting for the male sling over the artificial urinary sphincter. The modern male sling has continued to evolve with respect to device design and surgical technique. Various types of slings address sphincteric incompetence via different mechanisms of action. The recommended surgery, however, must be individualized to the patient based on degree of incontinence, detrusor contractility, and urethral compliance. A thorough urodynamic evaluation is indicated for the majority of patients, and the recommendation for an artificial urinary sphincter, a transobturator sling, or a quadratic sling will depend on urodynamic findings and the patient's particular preference. As advancements in this field evolve, and our understanding of the pathophysiology of incontinence and mechanisms of various devices improves, we expect to see continued evolution in device design.

show abstract

“…Results of initial and longer-term followup demonstrate success rates of 13–100% with larger series reporting rates of 54–79% [45, 47–52]. Patients required adjustments in 10–100% of cases, many of which required repeated anesthesia.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Male Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Review of Surgical Treatment Options and Outcomes

Trost

Elliott

2012

Advances in Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction and Objective. Iatrogenic male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) affects a percentage of men undergoing urologic procedures with a significant impact on quality of life. The treatment of male SUI has evolved significantly with multiple current options for treatment available. The current paper discusses preoperative evaluation of male SUI, available surgical options with reported outcomes, and postoperative complication management. Methods. A pubMed review of available literature was performed and summarized on articles reporting outcomes of placement of the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) or male slings including the bone anchored sling (BAS), retrourethral transobturator sling (RTS), adjustable retropubic sling (ARS), and quadratic sling. Results. Reported rates of success (variably defined) for BAS, RTS, ARS, and AUS are 36–67%, 9–79%, 13–100%, and 59–91% respectively. Complications reported include infection, erosion, retention, explantation, and transient pain. Male slings are more commonly performed in cases of low-to-moderate SUI with decreasing success with higher degrees of preoperative incontinence. Conclusions. An increasing number of options continue to be developed for the management of male SUI. While the AUS remains the gold-standard therapy for SUI, male sling placement is a proven viable alternative therapy for low-to-moderate SUI.

show abstract

Sistema REMEEX® para el tratamiento de la incontinencia de esfuerzo masculina: nuestra experiencia

Cited by 13 publications

References 5 publications

Remeex® System Effectiveness in Male Patients with Stress Urinary Incontinence

Remeex® System Effectiveness in Male Patients with Stress Urinary Incontinence

The artificial urinary sphincter and male sling for postprostatectomy incontinence: Which patient should get which procedure?

Male Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Review of Surgical Treatment Options and Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About