THE CUFF EROSIONS IN PATIENTS WHO UNDERWENT ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTER IMPLANTATION

Purpose:

To present the rates of cuff erosion and its risk factors after artificial uri-nary sphincter (AUS) implantation.

Material and Method:

Between 1989–2007, the records of patients who had un-dergone reoperation due to cuff erosions were reviewed amongst patients who had undergone AUS implantation for the treatment of postprostatectomy incontinence due to sphincteric insufficiency

Results:

AUS implant was removed because of erosions in 19 of the 51 patients who had undergone AUS implantation. AUS was implanted in 11, 4 and 4 patients follo-wing radical prostatectomy, transurethral prostatectomy and transvesical prostatec-tomy, respectively. Mean patient age during AUS implantations and erosions were 67 years (56–70) and 70 years (65–75), respectively. Mean interval time between imp-lantations and erosions were 29 months (8–204). Of the 19 patients, 11 (58%) had one or more than one systemic disorders such as coronary artery disease, hyperten-sion, chronic obstructive pulmoner disease, and diabetes mellitus. Of the 5 patients, 2 had undergone internal urethrotomy (IU) and dilatation, 3 had undergone urethral stent implantation for the treatment of urethral stricture before AUS implantation. In history of 19 patients, 6 (2 had urethral stent, 2 had (IU) had undergone urethral catheterization for monitoring of the urine volume output during the treatment of acut systemic disorder, 1 had undergone ureterorenoscopy for left ureteral dilatation. There was no identifiable causes in the remaining 12 patients.

Conclusion:

We think that the existence of systemic disorders and/or transurethral interventions before or after AUS implantation may have important risk factors for erosions