Artificial urinary sphincter (AMS-800) placement preserving the bulbospongiosus muscle

What is it about?

We believe that our study is relevant for publication because to date there are no studies that specifically assess the long-term impact of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement preserving the bulbospongiosus muscle in patients suffering from stress urinary incontinence (SUI) following a prostatectomy. The quality of evidence supporting the use of AUS in non-neurogenic male patients with SUI is low; based on heterogeneous data, low-quality studies, and mostly out-of-date efficacy outcome criteria. Moreover, the last review on this issue (“The Artificial Urinary Sphincter After a Quarter of a Century: A Critical Systematic Review of Its Use in Male Non-neurogenic Incontinence”. European Urology 63:2013; 681–9,) stated that AUS outcomes need to be revisited to be compared with new surgical alternatives, all of which should be prospectively evaluated. This study provides a prospective design, long follow-up period, an exact definition of the inclusion criteria, and efficacy outcomes that strengthen the results

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Our study suggests that the placement of AUS while preserving the bulbospongiosus muscle is technically simple and efficient, has an excellent rate of cure and social continence, reports a lower urethral erosion rate, and could delay the onset of urethral atrophy compared to other surgical procedures usually used for the placement of AUS.

Perspectives