The male perineal sling: Intermediate‐term results

Comiter, Craig V.

doi:10.1002/nau.20166

Cited by 122 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(52 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2). These findings are comparable to those previously reported [16,21]. Thus, it is possible that the high overall success rate of InVance in the present study could be attributable, at least in part, by a selection bias towards patients using < 5 PPD.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intermediate‐term results, up to 4 years, of a bone‐anchored male perineal sling for treating male stress urinary incontinence after prostate surgery

Guimarães¹,

Oliveira²,

Pinto³

et al. 2009

BJU International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

anaesthesia. Patients were considered cured, if they stopped wearing continence pads and improved if the daily number of pads used decreased by at least half. The Incontinence Quality of Life questionnaire and a simple verbal question about patient satisfaction with the surgery were also used and complications were measured. RESULTSIn all, 40 patients (65%) were cured and 14 (23%) were improved after a mean followup of 28 months. The UI cure rates at 3 and 4 years follow-up were 70% and 66%, respectively. The most common side-effect was transient scrotal or perineal pain or numbness, which affected 12 patients (19%). There was a prolonged postvoid residual urine volume of > 100 mL in six patients (10%), which resolved within 2 weeks of indwelling catheterization. Explantation of the sling was required in two cases (3%) because of infection. In one patient (2%), revision was required for bone-anchor dislodgement. CONCLUSIONThe InVance sling offers good intermediateterm cure and improvement rates for SUI after prostatectomy. The procedure has an acceptably low rate of minor complications, and should be considered for treating men with less severe forms ( ≤ 5 pads per day) of SUI. KEYWORDS

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…The bone-anchored male perineal sling was introduced by Comiter, who reported a UI cure rate of 65% and an UI improvement rate of 15% [15,16]. Subsequently, other studies provided success rates of 55-76% [17][18][19][20][21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intermediate‐term results, up to 4 years, of a bone‐anchored male perineal sling for treating male stress urinary incontinence after prostate surgery

Guimarães¹,

Oliveira²,

Pinto³

et al. 2009

BJU International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The sling was not clinically compressive for most of the patients as confirmed on clinical records, post-void residual and uroflowmetry, although a pressure-flow study was not conducted to document a possible urodynamic compressive effect. Urodynamic study in 22 men by Comiter (17) revealed that the bulbar urethral sling had no significant effects on voiding function. Nevertheless, in our series, one patient experienced postoperative complete retention possibly due to excess in tension or to an acontractility bladder reflex.…”

Section: Commentsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Comiter (17) had 65% cured and pad free patients at minimum 2 year follow-up with a polypropylene or polyester mesh using bone anchor fixation, however up to 16 % of patients reported perineal pain or numbness that persisted during many weeks. These adverse effects might possibly be due to irritation in the area of the bone screws or lesion to the perineal nerves (18) during ischiopubic rami dissection.…”

Section: Commentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transobturator male sling TOMS™ for the treatment of stress post-prostatectomy incontinence, initial experience and results with one year's experience

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Post-prostatectomy incontinence remains a problem, even in minor or moderate degrees. In order to minimize surgical morbidity and costs, sling procedures have been proposed. The authors have developed a new transobturator male sling procedure and report their results after one-year experience. Materials and Methods: A prospective multicenter study was conducted in 50 patients with minor or moderate post-prostatectomy incontinence. Evaluation of TOMS TM two arms bulbar sling was based on clinical form assessment, The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ) and short-form (SF) 36 questionnaire pre and postoperatively and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Results: The surgical procedure was considered easy to perform and no post-surgery complication was reported except for one retention. The median number of pads per day decreased significantly from 2 pads before surgery (95% CI: 2 -3) to 1 during the follow-up period (95% CI: 0 -2 at 360 days), and at 3 months patients using none or one pad per day were 30% and 32% respectively. The SF 36 continence and quality of life score improved from a median of 100 (95% CI: 83 -133) to 300 (95% CI: 167 -375), and the median ICIQ incontinence and quality of life score decreased from 15 (95% CI: 14 -16) to 8 (95% CI: 5 -12) one year after surgery. Conclusion: The transobturator perineal male sling TOMS TM is an attractive simple sling technique for moderate or minor post-prostatectomy stress incontinence and offers an improvement in the quality of life.

show abstract

“…Optimal cure rates have been reported with the bone-anchored perineal sling and generally range from 39% to 90%, depending on the method of evaluation and definition of success. [77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84] As more experience is gained with this procedure, the importance of patient and material selection is emphasized, as it greatly impacts outcome. In a study of 46 men with a mean follow-up period of 18 months, the procedure was successful in 76%, resulted in improvement in 35%, and failed in 24% of patients due to the use of absorbable graft material.…”

Section: Non-adjustable Male Slingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-prostatectomy incontinence: Etiology, evaluation, and management

Singla

2014

Turkish Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urinary incontinence after prostatectomy or radiation is a devastating problem in men and remains the most feared complication following the treatment of localized prostate cancer. With an increasing number of radical prostatectomies performed globally for prostate cancer, the impact of urinary incontinence on quality of life assumes an even greater importance. With the advent of male sling procedures, more men are now seeking treatment for incontinence. Since the introduction of the artificial urinary sphincter almost four decades ago, several surgical procedures have emerged to manage post-prostatectomy incontinence, including the male sling for milder forms of incontinence. Several of the newer procedures have shown promise in the United States; many others have been developed and utilized in other parts of the world, though they have not yet gained FDA approval in the United States. The present review seeks to illuminate the etiology, evaluation, and management of post-prostatectomy incontinence. An effort has been made to provide an algorithm to clinicians for appropriate surgical management. The surgical techniques of commonly performed procedures and their outcomes are described.

show abstract

The male perineal sling: Intermediate‐term results

Abstract: Intermediate-term results for the male sling demonstrate a success rate comparable to that of the AUS (80%

Cited by 122 publications

References 42 publications

Intermediate‐term results, up to 4 years, of a bone‐anchored male perineal sling for treating male stress urinary incontinence after prostate surgery

Intermediate‐term results, up to 4 years, of a bone‐anchored male perineal sling for treating male stress urinary incontinence after prostate surgery

Transobturator male sling TOMS™ for the treatment of stress post-prostatectomy incontinence, initial experience and results with one year's experience

Post-prostatectomy incontinence: Etiology, evaluation, and management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About