Success of the Artificial Urinary Sphincter After Failed Surgery for Incontinence

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
We implanted the artificial urinary sphincter in 15 incontinent patients for whom multiple urethral and bladder neck operations, including sphincter placement, had been unsuccessful. The 5 male and 10 female patients ranged from 3 to 26 years old (mean age 11 years). The etiology of incontinence was neurogenic bladder in 10 patients, epispadias in 2, exstrophy in 1, ectopic ureters in 1 and traumatic urethral disruption in 1. Of the 15 patients 13 required augmentation enterocystoplasty and clean intermittent catheterization. The initial anti-incontinence procedures were Young-Dees-Leadbetter bladder neck reconstruction in 10 patients, artificial urinary sphincter placement in 4 and bladder neck suspension in 1. Causes of failure of the primary treatment were erosion (artificial urinary sphincter), and incontinence and/or difficult catheterization (Young- Dees-Leadbetter). Followup from the last salvage operation averaged 21 months (range 6 to 37 months). A total of 58 operations was performed. Among the 4 patients in whom the artificial urinary sphincter eroded the bladder neck repeated attempts to place the cuff at the same site were unsuccessful and erosion occurred in all 4 within 1 year. Sphincter placement was more successful among the 11 patients who initially underwent Young-Dees-Leadbetter bladder neck reconstruction or bladder neck suspension; acceptable continence was attained in 8 patients (73%). We conclude that placement of the sphincter cuff around a previously eroded bladder neck probably will result in erosion. Sphincter implantation should be attempted in patients in whom bladder neck reconstruction has failed. Persistence in the treatment of these patients is essential because multiple operations often are necessary to achieve continence. (J. Urol, 143: 987–990, 1990)