#23239 скачать в хорошем качестве

#23239

Performance of the artificial urinary sphincter implantation in men with urinary incontinence. Results from a contemporary long-term real-world nationwide analysis. Zuluaga L1, Plata M1, Castaño J2, Schlesinger R3, Salazar M4, Silva J5, Benavides-Martinez J2, Santander J1, Garzón D6, Carvajal A2, Echeverry M3, Azuero J1, Serrano B7, Varela D5 1. Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, 2. Clínica CES, 3. Hospital Militar Central, 4. Clínica FOSCAL, 5. Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, 6. Clinica FOSCAL, 7. Clínica Marly KEYWORDS: Incontinence, Surgery, Male Urinary incontinence is a common complication after radical prostatectomy. In patients with severe urinary incontinence, surgical treatment is recommended, especially for those who have failed other conservative measures. International guidelines recommend the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) as the gold standard. Nowadays, the AMS 800 (Boston Scientific) is the device with the longest follow-up and the greatest level of evidence. An estimated 20,790 AUS were implanted in the last decade only in the United States. The device was first introduced in 1972 with the AMS 721 (American Medical Systems) and has been improved until the current model of 3 parts AMS 800. Surgical techniques involve either via penoscrotal (PS) or perineal (PN) approach, and cuffs are available in different sizes. In selected cases, a double‐cuff placement can be required. This variability requires surgical expertise for implant selection. Most of the current knowledge comes from high-volume centers, but little is known about the performance of this surgery from community practice. This study aims to report the contemporary AUS performance in a nationwide descriptive survey using proms for the assessment.