Łukasz Białek, Mikołaj Frankiewicz, Jan Adamowicz, Felix Campos-Juanatey, Andrea Cocci, Guglielmo Mantica, Clemens M Rosenbaum, Wesley Verla, Marjan Waterloos, Malte W Vetterlein
{"title":"因袖带侵蚀导致人工尿道括约肌切除术后的尿道管理。","authors":"Łukasz Białek, Mikołaj Frankiewicz, Jan Adamowicz, Felix Campos-Juanatey, Andrea Cocci, Guglielmo Mantica, Clemens M Rosenbaum, Wesley Verla, Marjan Waterloos, Malte W Vetterlein","doi":"10.5173/ceju.2023.132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The artificial urethral sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard treatment in cases of moderate-to-severe stress urinary incontinence in males. Cuff erosions are one of the most important distant complications of AUS implantation. The optimal urethral management has still not been established.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Search terms related to 'urethral stricture', 'artificial urinary sphincter', and 'cuff erosion' were used in the PubMed database to identify relevant articles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this mini review we identified 6 original articles that assessed the urethral management after AUS explantation due to cuff erosion and included urinary diversion by transurethral and/or suprapubic catheterization, urethrorrhaphy, and <i>in situ</i> urethroplasty. We summarized the results of different management methods and their efficacy in terms of preventing urethral stricture formation. We highlight the need for better-quality evidence on this topic.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The available data do not provide a clear answer to the question of optimal urethral management during AUS explantation. There is a great need to provide higher-quality evidence on this topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":9744,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Urology","volume":"76 4","pages":"322-324"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10789282/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Urethral management after artificial urinary sphincter explantation due to cuff erosion.\",\"authors\":\"Łukasz Białek, Mikołaj Frankiewicz, Jan Adamowicz, Felix Campos-Juanatey, Andrea Cocci, Guglielmo Mantica, Clemens M Rosenbaum, Wesley Verla, Marjan Waterloos, Malte W Vetterlein\",\"doi\":\"10.5173/ceju.2023.132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The artificial urethral sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard treatment in cases of moderate-to-severe stress urinary incontinence in males. Cuff erosions are one of the most important distant complications of AUS implantation. The optimal urethral management has still not been established.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Search terms related to 'urethral stricture', 'artificial urinary sphincter', and 'cuff erosion' were used in the PubMed database to identify relevant articles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this mini review we identified 6 original articles that assessed the urethral management after AUS explantation due to cuff erosion and included urinary diversion by transurethral and/or suprapubic catheterization, urethrorrhaphy, and <i>in situ</i> urethroplasty. We summarized the results of different management methods and their efficacy in terms of preventing urethral stricture formation. We highlight the need for better-quality evidence on this topic.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The available data do not provide a clear answer to the question of optimal urethral management during AUS explantation. There is a great need to provide higher-quality evidence on this topic.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Central European Journal of Urology\",\"volume\":\"76 4\",\"pages\":\"322-324\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10789282/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Central European Journal of Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2023.132\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central European Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2023.132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导言:人工尿道括约肌(AUS)是治疗男性中重度压力性尿失禁的金标准。袖带侵蚀是人工尿道括约肌植入术最重要的远期并发症之一。最佳尿道处理方法尚未确定:在 PubMed 数据库中使用与 "尿道狭窄"、"人工尿道括约肌 "和 "袖带侵蚀 "相关的关键词进行搜索,以确定相关文章:在这篇微型综述中,我们发现了 6 篇原创文章,这些文章评估了因袖带侵蚀而导致 AUS 剥离后的尿道处理方法,包括经尿道和/或耻骨上导尿术、尿道成形术和原位尿道成形术的尿流改道。我们总结了不同处理方法的结果及其在预防尿道狭窄形成方面的功效。我们强调在这一问题上需要更高质量的证据:结论:现有数据并不能明确回答 AUS 移植过程中的最佳尿道管理问题。我们亟需就这一问题提供更高质量的证据。
Urethral management after artificial urinary sphincter explantation due to cuff erosion.
Introduction: The artificial urethral sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard treatment in cases of moderate-to-severe stress urinary incontinence in males. Cuff erosions are one of the most important distant complications of AUS implantation. The optimal urethral management has still not been established.
Material and methods: Search terms related to 'urethral stricture', 'artificial urinary sphincter', and 'cuff erosion' were used in the PubMed database to identify relevant articles.
Results: In this mini review we identified 6 original articles that assessed the urethral management after AUS explantation due to cuff erosion and included urinary diversion by transurethral and/or suprapubic catheterization, urethrorrhaphy, and in situ urethroplasty. We summarized the results of different management methods and their efficacy in terms of preventing urethral stricture formation. We highlight the need for better-quality evidence on this topic.
Conclusions: The available data do not provide a clear answer to the question of optimal urethral management during AUS explantation. There is a great need to provide higher-quality evidence on this topic.