Laparoscopic approach for artificial urinary sphincter implantation in women with intrinsic sphincter deficiency incontinence: a single-centre preliminary experience

A robot-assisted laparoscopic revision of an artificial urinary sphincter in a patient with spinal cord injury

This step-by-step article demonstrates our approach to robot-assisted laparoscopic revision of a bladder neck sited artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) for a spinal cord injured patient. The bladder neck location of an AUS in the spinal cord injured demographic is ideal to minimise urethral complications and urinary tract infections, whilst the transabdominal approach reduces the risk of wound breakdown that can occur via the typical perineal incision for AUS insertion. The accompanying video will guide viewers as to our minimally invasive technique for cuff revision in the event of secondary surgery for recurrent urinary incontinence.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of complications of artificial urinary sphincters in female patients with urinary incontinence due to internal sphincter insufficiency

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common worldwide rising health issue among women with a prevalence of 5 to 70%. Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is the most common subtype of UI. There are different treatments for UI, including AUS (artificial urinary sphincter) implantation, as one of the surgical options for treating SUI. The aim of this study was to determine the complication rate of AUS, exclusively in female patients with SUI, which resulted from ISD (intrinsic sphincter deficiency). We also compared the complication rate between minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robotic surgery) and open approaches.

METHODS

Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched for studies regarding complications in AUS implantation surgery, from the beginning of the project to March 2022. After screening and reviewing of full text, the general characteristics of the study and study population including follow-up time, type of surgery, and the number of complications that occurred such as necrosis, atrophy, erosion, infection, mechanical failure, revision, and leak, were extracted.

RESULTS

We found that atrophy occurred in 1 of 188 (0.53%) patients treated with minimally invasive surgery and in 1 of 669 (0.15%) patients treated with open surgery. None of the 17 included studies reported the occurrence of necrosis in the patients under study. Erosion occurred in 9 of 188 (4.78%) patients treated with minimally invasive surgery and in 41 of 669 (6.12%) patients treated with open surgery. Infection occurred in 12 of 188 (6.38%) patients treated with minimally invasive surgery and in 22 of 669 (3.2%) patients treated with open surgery. The mechanical failure occurred in 1 of 188 (0.53%) patients treated with minimally invasive surgery and in 55 of 669 (8.22%) patients treated with open surgery. Reconstructive surgery occurred in 7 of 188 (3.72%) patients treated with minimally invasive surgery and in 95 of 669 (14.2%) patients treated with open surgery. Leaks occurred in 4 of 188 (2.12%) patients treated with minimally invasive surgery and in 6 of 669 (0.89%) patients treated with open surgery. The type of surgery was associated with a statistically significant increase in mechanical failure (p-value = 0.067) and infection (p-value = 0.021), and reconstructive surgery (p-value = 0.049). Out of the 857 participats in the study,469 were studied for less than five years and 388 were studied for more than five years.21 of 469 (4.4%) (p-value = 0.08) patients and 81 of 388 (20.8%) (p-value = 0.001) patients required reconstructive surgery. Erosion occurred in 23 of 469 (4.9%) (p-value = 0.01)patients with following time less than five years and in 27 of 388 (6.9%) (p-value = 0.001) patients with following time more than five years.

CONCLUSION

The use of artificial urinary sphincters in the treatment of UI causes complications such as atrophy, erosion, and infection; the amount of which is influenced by the surgical method and the duration of using the artificial urinary sphincter. It seems that the use of new surgical methods, such as laparoscopic surgery, is useful in reducing the incidence of complications.

The Asia-Pacific AMS800 artificial urinary sphincter consensus statement

This Asia-Pacific (AP) AMS 800™ artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) consensus statement aims to provide a set of practical recommendations to assist surgeons with the AMS 800 device surgery. The AP consensus committee consisted of key opinion leaders with extensive experience with AMS 800 surgery across several AP countries. The panel reviewed and discussed relevant findings with emphasis on locoregional and specific clinical challenges relevant to the AP region. Recommendations were made in key areas namely (1) patient selection and informed consent process; (2) preoperative assessment; (3) dealing with co-existing urological disorders; (4) surgical principles and intraoperative troubleshooting; (5) postoperative care; (6) special populations; and (7) cost analysis and comparative review. The AMS 800 device should be offered to males with moderate to severe stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Full informed consent should be undertaken, and emphasis is placed on surgical contraindications and high-risk candidates. The presence of a surgical mentor or referral to experts is recommended in complex AUS candidates. Preoperative cystoscopy with or without multichannel urodynamic study is necessary and patients with pre-existing urological disorders should be treated adequately and clinically stable before surgery. Adherence to strict patient selection and safe surgical principles are critical to ensure excellent clinical outcomes and minimize complications. Given that InhibiZone-coated device is not available in many AP countries, the use of prophylactic antibiotics pre-and post-operatively are recommended. The AMS 800 device should be prepared according to the manufacturer's guidelines and remains a cost-effective treatment for male SUI. The AMS 800 device remains the surgical benchmark for male SUI but is associated with certain mechanical limitations and a unique set of complications.

Outcomes of robot-assisted urinary sphincter implantation for male neurogenic urinary incontinence

OBJECTIVES

To report the functional outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter implantation (R-AUS) in men with neurogenic stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A monocentric retrospective study included all consecutive adult male neuro-urological patients who underwent R-AUS for SUI between January 2011 and August 2018. The AUS was implanted via a transperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic approach. Intraoperative and early postoperative complications were reported (Clavien-Dindo classification). Continence was defined as no pad usage. Revision and explantation rates were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 men with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 45 (37-54) years were included. No conversion to laparotomy was needed. Three minor (Clavien-Dindo Grade I-II) early postoperative complications occurring in three (15.8%) patients were reported. The median (IQR) follow-up was 58 (36-70) months. At the end of the follow-up, the continence rate was 89.5%. The AUS revision and explantation rates were 5.3% and 0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A R-AUS is a safe and efficient procedure for AUS implantation in adult male neuro-urological patients, referring to the challenging open technique.

New technique of robot-assisted laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter implantation in female by a posterior approach with intraoperative cystoscopic monitoring

PURPOSE

To report the early experience of a modified technique of robot-assisted artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in female, with a posterior approach to the bladder neck and intraoperative real-time cystoscopic monitoring.

METHODS

Retrospective monocentric study included all consecutive female who underwent a primary robot-assisted AUS implantation between 2017 and 2019. Real-time intraoperative cystoscopic monitoring was carried out to check the correct level of the dissection and to avoid any injury during bladder neck dissection. Perioperative and intraoperative data, functional outcomes and complications were assessed. Continence was defined as 0 to 1 pad per day.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were included, the median age was 66 years, 23/24 (96%) had previous SUI or prolapse surgery. Two conversions to open surgery and 2 modifications of the surgical technique with anterior dissection of the bladder neck were required due to major vesicovaginal adhesions. Overall, 20 patients underwent the robotic posterior approach. Eleven intraoperative complications in 10 patients (50%) occurred, including 7 bladder injuries 4 vaginal injuries, without the need to stop the procedure. The median hospital stay was 3 days (2-7). One AUS was removed at 1 year due to vaginal erosion. At last follow-up (median 26 months (22-36)), 95% of the devices were in place and activated and the continence rate was 84%.

CONCLUSIONS

Early functional results of robot-assisted AUS implantation with a posterior approach to the bladder neck and intraoperative cystoscopic monitoring are promising despite the high rate of intraoperative complications due to previous surgeries. Further evaluation of this technique is required.

Outcomes of laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter in women with stress urinary incontinence: mid-term evaluation

PURPOSE

Although artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has become an established treatment for moderate to severe stress urinary incontinence (SUI), implantation can be challenging. This study aimed to review the outcomes of laparoscopic AUS (LAUS) implantation and revision in women presenting with SUI.

METHODS

We reviewed the files of female patients presenting with moderate to severe SUI treated with LAUS implantation from October 2007 to July 2017. Surgeries were performed by one surgeon experienced in open AUS implantation and starting LAUS implantation. The primary endpoint was postoperative urinary continence, which was divided into three categories: complete continence, improved continence, and unchanged incontinence. The secondary outcomes were complications, explantation-free and revision-free time.

RESULTS

A total of 49 women (mean age 64 years, range 40-80) had LAUS implantation. Among the 42 patients (85.7%) with an AUS in place at the last follow-up, 25 (59.5%) were fully continent, 16 (38.1%) had improved continence, and 1 (2.4%) had unchanged incontinence. At the last follow-up, 29 (59.2%) patients had their initial AUS and 13 (26.5%) had at least one reintervention. There were 9 (18.4%) intraoperative complications and 25 (51%) postoperative complications, of which 9 (18.4%) were Clavien⩾3. After a median follow-up of 4 years, 9 (18.4%) explantations and 11 (22.5%) revisions occurred. The average period without explantation or revision was 3.7 and 3.1 years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that the laparoscopic approach for AUS implantation is an efficient treatment option for women with moderate to severe SUI.

Robot-assisted artificial urinary sphincter implantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of the present manuscript was to provide an overview on the current state of robotic artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in male and female patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the past few years, several series have been reported, with promising outcomes for the most part. This has contributed to expand the use of bladder neck AUS, especially in female patients, which was, until then, hampered by its perioperative morbidity.

SUMMARY

Robotic AUS has been developed to overcome the technical challenge of bladder neck implantation in female patients and in specific male subgroups, especially self-catheterizing neurological patients. All the series of robotic AUS implantation published in the past few years reported much lower rates of cuff erosion and AUS explantation than the historical open cohorts suggesting that the robotic approach might become the standard for female AUS implantation. This less morbid approach along with technological improvement of the AUS device may contribute to make it a more popular option in the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency. There are much less data available on robotic bladder neck AUS implantation in male patients.

Artificial urinary sphincter surgery in the special populations: neurological, revision, concurrent penile prosthesis and female stress urinary incontinence groups

The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) remains the standard of care in men with severe stress urinary incontinence (SUI) following prostate surgery and radiation. While the current AUS provides an effective, safe, and durable treatment option, it is not without its limitations and complications, especially with regard to its utility in some “high-risk” populations. This article provides a critical review of relevant publications pertaining to AUS surgery in specific high-risk groups such as men with spinal cord injury, revision cases, concurrent penile prosthesis implant, and female SUI. The discussion of each category includes a brief review of surgical challenge and a practical action-based set of recommendations. Our increased understandings of the pathophysiology of various SUI cases coupled with effective therapeutic strategies to enhance AUS surgery continue to improve clinical outcomes of many patients with SUI.

Current Use of the Artificial Urinary Sphincter in Adult Females

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of the present report was to review the recent evidences regarding the use of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in adult females.

RECENT FINDINGS

While the excellent functional outcomes of AUS in female patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD) have been reported for decades, its use has remained confidential in most countries likely due to its challenging implantation and inherent morbidity. Over the past few years, laparoscopic and, more recently, robotic techniques of AUS implantation in female patients have been described with promising perioperative outcomes. As a result, the use of AUS has increased in several countries. The indications are mostly recurrent or persistent SUI after previous anti-incontinence procedures and neurogenic SUI. Owing to its unique potential to restore continence while maintaining low outlet resistance during the voiding phase, AUS may be of special interest in female patients with detrusor underactivity. High level of evidence data from trials which are underway, along with developments in robotic surgery and technological refinements of the device, may well, almost 50 years after its introduction, give to the AUS its momentum as a major contributor in the female SUI armamentarium. While the use of AUS in female patients has been restricted to some countries and a few high-volume centers, it has started spreading again over the past few years, thanks to the rise of minimally invasive approaches which facilitate its implantation, and this is yielding promising outcomes.

Joint Report on Terminology for Surgical Procedures to Treat Stress Urinary Incontinence in Women

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Standardized terminology for surgical procedures commonly performed to treat stress urinary incontinence in women is needed to facilitate research, clinical care, and teaching in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery.

METHODS

This report combines the input of members of the American Urogynecologic Society and the International Urogynecological Association, assisted by external referees. Extensive searches of the literature were performed, including Instructions for Use brochures and original source documents where possible. Historical context was considered along with procedural modifications, and expert opinion was included when appropriate.

RESULTS

A terminology report for the procedures commonly performed to treat stress urinary incontinence in women was produced. Included procedures are midurethral sling, retropubic colposuspension, pubovaginal sling, urethral bulking, and artificial urinary sphincter. Appropriate figures have been included to supplement and help clarify the text. Ongoing review will be performed periodically to keep the document updated and widely acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

This document is a literature and consensus-based terminology report for surgical procedures to treat stress urinary incontinence in women. Future publications in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery should use this standardized terminology whenever possible.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and functional outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter implantation in women with stress urinary incontinence

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the complications and results of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

METHODS

A selective database search using keywords (1990-2019) was conducted to validate the effectiveness of the AUS in women. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were utilised. The meta-analysis included 964 women (15 studies) with persistent SUI. The Newcastle-Ottawa score was used to determine the quality of the evidence in each study. The success rate and complications associated with the AUS were analysed.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of the published studies showed that complete continence was achieved at a mean rate of 79.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 72.2-86.6%) and a significant improvement was achieved in 15% (95% CI 10-25%). The mean (range) follow-up was 22 (6-204) months. The mean number of patients per study was 68. The mean (range) explantation rate was 13 (0-44)%. Vaginal erosion occurred in a mean (range) of 9 (0-27)% and mechanical complications in 13 (0-47)%. Infections accounted for 7% of the complications. The total mean (range) revision rate of the implanted AUS was 15.42 (0-44)%. The mean (range) size of the cuff used was 6.7 (5-10) cm.

CONCLUSION

Our present analysis showed that implantation of an AUS in women with severe UI is an effective treatment option after failure of first-line therapy. However, the currently available study population is too small to draw firm conclusions.

ABBREVIATIONS

AMS: American Medical Systems; AUS: artificial urinary sphincter; EAU: European Association of Urology; LE: Level of Evidence; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; QoL: quality of life; SHELTER: Services and Health for Elderly in Long TERm care (study); SUI: (stress) urinary incontinence.

The current state and the future of robotic surgery in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery

In this article, we review the current uses and future directions of robotic surgery in the field of female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery. Pelvic surgery is ideal for the use of surgical robots, which provide improved visualization and ease of suturing deep within the pelvis. Robots have been successfully used for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse, in procedures such as sacrocolpopexy, sacrohysteropexy, and uterosacral ligament plication. Surgeons have used the robotic successfully to treat various etiologies of female pelvic pain including fibroids, endometriosis, and nerve entrapment. Robotic repair of iatrogenic injury has been described with excellent outcomes and avoidance of conversion to open surgery in the event of an injury caused using the robotic platform. While more data is needed on this topic, there has been increasing interest in using the robot for urologic reconstruction including repair of vesico-vaginal fistula, cystectomy, augmentation cystoplasty, and continent and non-continent diversions. Recently the use of the robot has been described in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in females, with robotic placement of an artificial urinary sphincter. While robotic surgery is associated with increased cost, the outcomes of robotic surgery in female urology are promising. More studies that properly evaluate the benefits of robotic surgery as compared to open and laparoscopic approaches are needed.

Are Slings Still the Gold Standard for Female Stress Urinary Incontinence?

As slings are the most frequent first-line treatment for management of female urinary incontinence, an artificial urinary sphincter may be indicated in cases of failure and sphincter deficiency. The level of evidence has to improve and prospective studies or new devices are awaited.

A new approach to laparoscopic implantation of the artificial urinary sphincter: Vesicovaginal approach to the bladder neck

INTRODUCTION

The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is not used extensively in the treatment of female urinary stress incontinence (USI) due to the poor reproducibility of the techniques used. We describe a new approach to laparascopic implantation, of which dissection of the vesicovaginal space is an essential step. This enables an approach under direct vision to the posterior surface of the bladder neck.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We present two cases where this approach was used. A transperitoneal approach was made in the Trendelenburg position. The main steps were: creating the vesicovaginal space until identifying the bladder neck, creating two laterovesical spaces, communicating these with the vesicovaginal space, and dissecting the anterior surface of the bladder neck, attempting to preserve the pubovesical ligament. The cuff and reservoir were inserted through the 12mm infraumbilical trocar. The connections were externalised through a left suprapubic incision and a subcutaneous tunnel created up to the labia majora where the activation pump was placed. The procedure was completed with closure of the peritoneum. It is essential to use a vaginal valve to facilitate dissection.

RESULTS

Surgery time: 140 and 135minutes, with no intraoperative complications. After removing the urinary catheter, one patient had elevated postvoid residual urine volume, which was managed conservatively. Hospital stay: 72h. At 3 and 9 months the patients were fully continent.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the preliminary results of laparoscopic implantation of an AUS through a vesicovaginal approach to the posterior surface of the bladder neck, which might reduce potential complications that have been observed after the routine techniques.

AMS-800 Artificial urinary sphincter in female patients with stress urinary incontinence: A systematic review

AIMS

To perform a systematic review of studies reporting the outcomes of AMS-800 artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in female patients with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) resulting from intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD).

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the Medline and Embase databases was performed in June 2018 in accordance with the PRISMA statement. No time limit was used. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018099612). Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Of 886 records screened, 17 were included. All were retrospective or prospective non-comparative case series. One study reported on vaginal AUS implantation, 11 on open AUS implantation, two on laparoscopic AUS implantation, two on robot-assisted AUS implantation and one compared open and robot-assisted implantations. The vast majority of patients had undergone at least one anti-incontinence surgical procedure prior to AUS implantation (69.1-100%). The intraoperative bladder neck injury rates ranged from 0% to 43.8% and the intraoperative vaginal injury rates ranged from 0 to 25%. After mean follow-up periods ranging from 5 to 204 months, the complete continence rates ranged from 61.1% to 100%. The rates of explantation, erosion and mechanical failure varied from 0% to 45.3%, 0% to 22.2% and 0% to 44.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

AMS-800 AUS can provide excellent functional outcomes in female patients with SUI resulting from ISD but at the cost of a relatively high morbidity. High level of evidence studies are needed to help better define the role of AUS in the female SUI armamentarium.

Robot-assisted AMS-800 Artificial Urinary Sphincter Bladder Neck Implantation in Female Patients with Stress Urinary Incontinence

BACKGROUND

Widespread adoption of the AMS-800 artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in female patients has been hampered by the surgical morbidity of its implantation through an open approach.

OBJECTIVE

To describe a standardized technique of robotic bladder neck AUS implantation in female patients, and to report the perioperative and functional outcomes obtained by multiple surgeons with this technique.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS

We retrospectively reviewed the charts of all female patients who underwent robotic AUS implantation for urinary incontinence due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency between March 2012 and March 2017 in five institutions. Most of the 10 surgeons involved were not highly experienced in female AUS implantation and/or in robotic surgery.

SURGICAL PROCEDURE

The AUS is implanted at the bladder neck through a transperitoneal robotic approach. The finger placed by the assistant surgeon in the vagina is paramount to expose the vesicovaginal space and guide the robotic surgeon throughout the bladder neck dissection.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary endpoint was the incontinence categorized as complete continence(ie, no pads used), improved incontinence, or unchanged incontinence.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Forty-nine female patients underwent a robotic AUS implantation. There were eight intraoperative complications (16.3%): five bladder neck injuries and three vaginal injuries. Nine patients experienced postoperative complications (18.3%), but only two were Clavien ≥3 (4.1%). After a median follow-up of 18.5 mo, one explantation (vaginal erosion, 2.1%) and three revisions (one mechanical and two nonmechanical failure, 6.1%) were needed. At last follow-up, 40 patients were fully continent (81.6%), six had improved incontinence (12.2%), and three had unchanged incontinence (6.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

In this first multicenter series of robot-assisted AUS implantation, our technique appeared feasible, safe, and reproducible with perioperative and functional outcomes in the early learning curve not inferior to those reported in large series of open AUS implantation from tertiary referral centers.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Robot-assisted bladder neck AMS-800 artificial urinary sphincter implantation in female patients with stress urinary incontinence resulting from intrinsic sphincter deficiency is feasible, safe, and reproducible with promising outcomes.

Laparoscopic implantation of artificial urinary sphincter in women with intrinsic sphincter deficiency: Mid-term outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the safety and the mid-term continence rates of laparoscopic implantation of artificial urinary sphincter in women.

METHODS

A total of 52 women with intrinsic sphincter deficiency underwent a laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter implantation from 2005 to 2015 at Surgical Clinic Du Pré, Le Mans, France. The artificial urinary sphincter was implanted around the bladder neck by a transperitoneal laparoscopic approach to the Retzius space. Urodynamic assessment was carried out. Postoperative functional outcome was defined as success (no leaking, no pad use), improvement (>50% decrease in number of leakages, >50% decrease in number of pads used or use of light protection) or failure (<50% improvement, persistent or increased leaking). Outcome measures also included perioperative and long-term complications.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 69.1 years (range 64-82 years). After a mean follow up of 37.5 months (median 24 months; range 1-125 months), 38 (77.6%) patients were considered to be continent (no leakage, no pads), and eight (16.3%) improved their grade of incontinence. Three patients abandoned the follow-up schedule and were excluded. There was no perioperative severe complication. Artificial urinary sphincter revision was needed in 11 (22.4%) patients, requiring a total of seven redo procedures and four permanent sphincter removals. The main reasons for redo procedures were six (11.2%) mechanical problems and one vaginal erosion (2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Herein we report one of the largest series with the longest follow up evaluating the outcomes of laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter implantation in female patients. This approach seems to be a safe and effective treatment option for patients with intrinsic sphincter deficiency.

Artificial Urinary Sphincter: Report of the 2015 Consensus Conference

PURPOSE

The AMS800™ device, by far the most frequently implanted artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) worldwide, is considered to be the "gold-standard" when male incontinence surgical treatment is contemplated. Despite 40 years of experience, it is still a specialized procedure with a number of challenges. Here, we present the recommendations issued from the AUS Consensus Group, regarding indications, management, and follow-up AMS800™ implantation or revision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Under ICS auspices, an expert panel met on July 10, 2015 in Chicago, IL, USA in an attempt to reach a consensus on diverse issues related to the AMS800™ device. Participants were selected by the two co-chairs on the basis of their practice in a University hospital and their experience: number of implanted AUSs according to AMS (American Medical System Holdings Inc., Minnetonka, MN) records and/or major published articles. Topics listed were the result of a pre-meeting email brainstorming by all participants. The co-chairs distributed topics randomly to all participants, who then had to propose a statement on each topic for approval by the conference after a short evidence-based presentation, when possible.

RESULTS

A total of 25 urologists were invited to participate, 19 able to attend the conference. The present recommendations, based on the most recent and relevant data available in literature as well as expert opinions, successively address multiple specific and problematic issues associated with the AMS800™ trough a eight-chapter structure: pre-operative assessment, pre operative challenges, implantation technique, post-operative care, trouble-shooting, outcomes, special populations, and the future of AUSs.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines undoubtedly constitute a reference document, which will help urologists to carefully select patients and apply the most adapted management to implantation, follow-up and trouble-shooting of the AMS800™.

Persistent urinary incontinence after a robot-assisted artificial urinary sphincter procedure: lessons learnt from two cases

This case report describes 2 cases of persistent urinary incontinence in the beginning of the learning curve of robot-assisted bladder neck implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (RA-AUS) in men at risk for erosion due to neurological lesions. Among a series of 4 RA-AUS, 2 patients still experienced urinary incontinence after surgery. A complete urological workup was strictly normal and did not show any device malfunction. However, during an AUS revision in these two patients, exploration revealed that the cuff was not tight enough. This issue was resolved by placing smaller cuffs. After re-do surgery, one of the two patients no longer had urinary incontinence, while the second patient was lost to follow-up. Insufficient tightness of the cuff could be explained by an inability of the surgeon to feel the force while pulling the cuff around the urethra due to the absence of haptic sensation in robotic surgery.

Laparoscopic implantation of artificial urinary sphincter: An option for treating recurrent female urinary incontinence

INTRODUCTION

The failure rate for anti-incontinence surgery ranges from 5% to 80%. There is not actual consensus on the use of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) as treatment for recurrent urinary incontinence in women. Several authors have shown that AUS can be useful, if the intrinsic sphincteric deficiency is checked. We present the first case in Spain, to our knowledge, of laparoscopic implantation of AUS as treatment for female recurrent urinary incontinence.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Under general anaesthesia, patient was placed in supine decubitus with slight Trendelenburg, access to the vagina was verified. Through a transperitoneal pelvic laparoscopic approach, Retzius space was opened and then the laterovaginal spaces up to the endopelvic fascia. To facilitate the dissection of the bladder neck, we inserted a swab into the vagina, performing simultaneous traction and countertraction manoeuvres. As an access port for the AUS, we widened the incision of the lower trocar. We adjusted the periurethral cuff and then placed the reservoir and the pump in the laterovesical space and the labia majora of the vulva, respectively. Lastly, we connected the 3 AUS elements and peritoneum was closed to isolate AUS from the intestine.

RESULTS

The surgical time was 92min, the estimated blood loss was <100cc(3) and the hospital stay was 48h. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. The AUS was activated at 6 weeks. At 24 months, patient managed the AUS adequately and total continence was achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic implantation of AUS is a feasible technique. Transvaginal traction and countertraction manoeuvres can prevent intraoperative lesions.

Artificial urinary sphincter implantation in women with stress urinary incontinence: preliminary comparison of robot-assisted and open approaches

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

We aimed to compare outcomes of open and robot-assisted artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in female patients.

METHODS

The charts of all female patients who underwent an AUS implantation between 2008 and 2014 in a single center were retrospectively reviewed. From 2008 to 2012, AUS were implanted using an open approach and from 2013 to 2014 using a robot-assisted approach. Perioperative and functional parameters were compared between groups. The primary endpoint was continence status.

RESULTS

Twenty-four women were assessed: 16 in the open group and eight in the robot-assisted group. Three patients had neurogenic stress urinary incontinence. Most patients had undergone previous procedures for urinary incontinence (15 in the open group and seven in the robotic group). Mean operative time was similar in both groups (214 vs. 211 min; p = 0.90). Postoperative complicationsrate was lower in the robot-assisted group (25 vs. 75 %; p = 0.02). There was a trend toward a lower intraoperative complication rate (37.5 vs. 62.5 %; p = 0.25), decreased blood loss (17 ml vs. 275 ml; p = 0.22), and shorter length of stay (3.5 vs. 9.3 days; p = 0.09) in the robot-assisted group. Continence rates were comparable in both groups (75 vs. 68.8 %; p = 0.75). Three AUS explantations were needed in the open group (18.8 %) compared with one in the robot-assisted group (12.5 %; p = 0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

In female patients, the robot-assisted approach compared with open AUS implantation could decrease intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, length of hospital stay, and blood loss.

Laparoscopic implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter around the prostatic urethra

Objective

To report the first laparoscopic periprostatic implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) after a transurethral resection of the prostate.

Background

The implantation of an AUS is a standard procedure for severe urinary incontinence. In men it is usually implanted through a perineal approach, with the cuff placed around the bulbous urethra, bladder neck, or even around the prostate.

Method

We report a laparoscopic periprostatic implantation of an AUS after a transurethral resection of a prostate in a 72-year-old-man with incontinence.

Results

The operative duration was 180 min and the blood loss was 150 mL. There were no complications. After activating the AUS the patient was totally continent.

Conclusion

The laparoscopic periprostatic implantation of an AUS is a safe, effective and considerably less invasive procedure.

Considerations in the modern management of stress urinary incontinence resulting from intrinsic sphincter deficiency

PURPOSE

Intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD) is a common cause of stress urinary incontinence and is associated with more severe symptoms, often being associated with failed previous surgery. Due to the impaired sphincteric function, alternative surgical approaches are often required. The purpose of this review is to appraise the contemporary literature on the diagnosis and management of ISD.

METHODS

A PubMed search was performed to identify articles published between 1990 and 2014 using the following terms: ISD, stress urinary incontinence and type III stress urinary incontinence. Publications were screened for relevance, and full manuscripts were retrieved.

RESULTS

Most studies base the diagnosis of ISD upon urodynamic appearances using recognized criteria (Valsalva leak point pressure <60 cm H2O or a maximum urethral closure pressure <20 cm H2O) in addition to clinical features. A range of non-surgical and surgical treatment options are available for the patient. Pubovaginal slings are more effective than retropubic colposuspensions with outcomes comparable to those reported with midurethral slings. The artificial urinary sphincter provides long-term cure rates; however, it is associated with specific morbidity including device erosion, mechanical failure and revision. The benefits of bulking agents, however, are not sustained beyond 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

There are few randomized controlled trials that compare accepted treatments specifically for patients with ISD. The lack of standardization in the definition and diagnostic criteria used limits inter-study comparisons. An assessment of urethral pressure profile when combined with the clinical features may help predict outcomes of surgical intervention.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic approach for artificial urinary sphincter implantation in 11 women with urinary stress incontinence: surgical technique and initial experience

BACKGROUND

Artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation is recommended for women suffering urinary stress incontinence. Robot-assisted laparoscopy allows improved dexterity and visibility compared to traditional laparoscopy, potentially providing significant advantages for deep pelvic surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To report our surgical technique and initial experience in transperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic AUS implantation in women with urinary stress incontinence.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Eleven eligible patients with AUS implantation or revision using robot-assisted laparoscopy for urinary stress incontinence were included between January 2012 and February 2014 at Department of Urology, Lille University Hospital.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

Procedures were performed with the assistance of a four-arm da Vinci robot. The urethrovaginal space was dissected after transperitoneal access to the Retzius space. An 11-mm port placed in the right iliac fossa allowed introduction of the AUS device. The cuff and balloon tubes were externalised via a 5-mm suprapubic incision. The peritoneum was finally sutured.

MEASUREMENTS

Clinical data were prospectively collected before, during, and after the procedure. Results were classified as complete continence (no leakage and no pad usage), social continence (leakage and/or pad usage with no impact on social life), or failure (leakage and/or pad usage impacting social life).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

After mean follow-up of 17.6 mo (interquartile range 10.8-26 mo), eight patients (72.7%) had a successful AUS implantation, of whom seven (87.5%) reported complete continence and one had social continence. Two vaginal injuries and two bladder injuries occurred intraoperatively. Two patients experienced early minor postoperative complications and two had a major postoperative complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted laparoscopic AUS implantation is a feasible procedure. Further studies will better assess the place of robot-assisted laparoscopy in AUS implantation.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We investigated the treatment of 11 patients with stress urinary incontinence using robot-assisted implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). The results show that the procedure is feasible procedure, and future studies will to help assess the place of robot-assisted laparoscopy in AUS implantation.

Laparoscopic surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse and female stress urinary incontinence

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) occurs in a relatively big population of women which is continuously increasing and is associated with a variety of urinary bowel and sexual symptoms. As this problem magnifies, the need for surgical repair is increasing relatively. The main goals of surgical repair for POP include: no anatomic prolapse, no functional symptoms, patient satisfaction and avoidance of complications, goals that cannot always be fully achieved. The decision for the type of surgery depends of various factors such as patient characteristics and prolapsed compartment but also by the surgeon expertise. The laparoscopic approach is already the gold standard procedure for many urologic procedures and can also be used for the treatment of POP and stress urinary incontinence. Herein, we review the literature about the available data concerning laparoscopic surgery techniques for treating POP.

The current role of the artificial urinary sphincter in male and female urinary incontinence

The evolution of the artificial urinary sphincter has affected the current surgical options for urinary incontinence. With its unique features, the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has been an attractive option for the treatment of urinary incontinence regardless of gender. The current paper discusses the indications, contraindications, types of devices, surgical approaches, outcomes, and complications of the AUS in the treatment of both male and female urinary incontinence. A PubMed review of the available literature was performed and articles reporting implantation of artificial urinary sphincters for urinary incontinence in both male and female patients were evaluated. There was a comparable satisfactory continence rate after the implantation of an AUS (59~97% in males vs. 60~92% in females). In comparison, there were some differences in the indications, contraindications, surgical approaches, outcomes, and complications of the AUS implanted for urinary incontinence in male and female patients. AUS implantation is a safe and effective surgical option for the treatment of urinary incontinence of various etiologies. Continuous evolution of the device has made it an attractive option for the treatment of both male and female urinary incontinence.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter insertion in men with neurogenic stress urinary incontinence

OBJECTIVE

To describe for the first time the technique of robot-assisted artificial urinary sphincter (R-AUS) insertion in male patients with neurogenic incontinence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2011 to the present date, six patients with spinal cord injury have undergone R-AUS insertion at our academic institution and we have prospectively collected data on pre-, peri- and early postoperative outcomes. A transperitoneal five-port approach was used using a three-arm standard da Vinci® robot (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) in a 30° reverse Trendelenburg position. The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) cuff was placed circumferentially around the bladder neck, the reservoir was left intra-abdominally in a lateral vesicular space and the pump was placed in a classic scrotal position.

RESULTS

All six patients had successful robotic implantation of the AUS. The median patient age was 51.5 years, the median (range) operating time was 195 (175-250) min with no significant blood loss or intra-operative complications. The median (range) length of hospital stay was 4 (4-6) days. At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 13 (6-21) months, all six patients had a functioning device with complete continence. To date, we have observed no incidence of early erosion, device infection or device malfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

Allowing for the preliminary nature of our data, R-AUS insertion appears safe and technically feasible. Larger studies with long-term follow-up and comparison with open AUS insertion are necessary before definitive statements can be made for R-AUS in respect of complications and functional outcomes.

[Pelvic radiotherapy and artificial urinary sphincter in women]

OBJECTIVES

A retrospective evaluation of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in women with previous pelvic radiotherapy (PR).

POPULATION AND METHODS

From May 1987 to December 2009, on the 215 women implanted with AUS, nine (4.2%) had previous PR. We compared two groups of women, the first one without PR (group 1; n=206) and the other group with PR (group 2; n=9). Previous preop. urodynamics were realized. Patients using more than one pad per day at the end of follow-up were considered in failure.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up for these two groups was 6 years (SD: 5.6 years), with a mean age of 62.8 years. Mean delay between PR and surgery was 14 years. PR was indicated for cervix cancer in 78% (7/9), endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer in 9% (1/9) each. PR was responsible of an increased rate of AUS erosion and explantation (P<0.001). In group 2, more than half of women had AUS failure and 60% for AUS erosion, versus 22% and 26% respectively in group 1. In group 2, all the AUS eroded were explanted, one third of women, with a mean delay of 59.8 months (4-140) with AUS implantation.

CONCLUSION

AUS implantation in a female population with previous PR is not necessary inconsistent, but the failure rate is high. This difficult surgery should be reserved for specialized centres.

Prospective comparison of short-term functional outcomes obtained after pure laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively compare short-term functional outcomes achieved by laparoscopic or robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We prospectively collected clinical and operative data over 24 months for female patients who underwent either pure laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSCP) or robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALSCP). Clinical data included age, BMI and assessment of PFDI-20 score. Perioperative data included operative time and complications. Post-operative outcomes included hospital stay, length of catheterisation, pain and functional outcomes as assessed by clinical examination and PFDI-20 score assessment.

RESULTS

Overall, 67 women with a median age of 65 were included: 47 in the LSCP arm and 20 in the RALSCP arm. RALSCP was superior in terms of blood loss (median 55mls vs. 280; P = 0.03) and strict operative time (median 125 min vs. 220; P < 0.0001), but this time advantage was nullified when comparing overall operating room time (215 min vs. 220). With a median follow-up of 16 months, the overall anatomic repair rate was 98.5%, and there was an improvement in overall PFDI-20 score before and after surgery (P = 0.001) but with no difference between the two surgical approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

RALSCP allows for a safe and effective repair of pelvic organ prolapse in female patients. Whilst being equivalent to LSCP in terms of functional outcome, it is superior in terms of blood loss and strict operative time. These results are based on short-term assessment, and further studies of larger populations with longer follow-up and objective assessments of outcome are needed to make any definitive statement.

Female urinary incontinence and artificial urinary sphincter: study of efficacy and risk factors for failure and complications

BACKGROUND

The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has become a commonly used therapy for severe urinary incontinence (UI) due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate retrospectively the efficacy and risk factors for failure and complications of AUS implantation in women with nonneurologic UI.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

From May 1987 to December 2009, 215 women with ISD were treated by AUS implantation, with a mean age of 62.8 yr and a mean follow-up of 6 yr (standard deviation: 5.6 yr). Previous surgical procedures to treat incontinence had been performed in 88.8% of the patients. Urodynamic assessment was required. Patients using only 0 or 1 pad at the end of follow-up were considered continent. The patient's level of satisfaction was evaluated by a global analogue scale and clinical interview.

INTERVENTION

All women had AUS implantation.

MEASUREMENTS

Patients were evaluated for continence rate, risk factors for failures, and complications.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

At the end of follow-up, 158 patients (73.5%) were continent, and 170 (79%) were satisfied. The redo rate was 15.3% after a mean interval of 8.47 yr for the first redo procedure. Fifteen explantations (7%) were performed. The only risk factor for intraoperative complications (10.7%) was smoking (p<0.004). Six patients (2.8%) were lost to follow-up. AUS failed to treat incontinence in 51 patients (23.7%) due to defective manipulation in 27.4% of the cases. On multivariate analysis, risk factors for failure were age >70 yr (odds ratio [OR]: 2.46), a history of the Burch procedure (OR: 2.28), or pelvic radiotherapy (OR: 4.37) (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The place for this safe and long-lasting effective technique in the treatment of UI due to recurrent sphincter deficiency is confirmed. Screening for these risk factors should allow better patient selection.

Artificial urinary sphincter (AMS 800) implantation for women with intrinsic sphincter deficiency: a technique for insiders?

Artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation is one of several surgical options for the treatment of female stress urinary incontinence. It is indicated for women with both clinically and urodynamically defined intrinsic sphincter deficiency that significantly affects quality of life. The erosion/revision risk increases after several previous surgical interventions. Therefore, women believed to be candidates for AUS implantation should be rapidly (after the failure of a maximum of two previous surgical procedures) referred to specialized centres, where the knowledge and experience concerning the diagnosis, surgery and management of female stress urinary incontinence is concentrated. To refer correctly, non-academic urologists/gynaecologists should also be well informed about AUS implantation. Only in this way can the patient weigh the high long-term success rate and high quality of life improvement of AUS implantation against the greater complication/revision risk and take a well-considered decision.