
pmid: 2756364
Experiences with various types of implantable urinary incontinence prostheses based on two principles, passive compression of the urethra (Kaufman) or artificial dynamic sphincter (Scott) are recounted. The series consists of 40 patients, 3 women and 37 men. The cause of incontinence was transurethral resection of the prostate or open prostatectomy in 29 cases, radical prostatectomy in 3 cases, neurogenic bladder in 7 cases and urethroplasty in 1 case. The success rate with the Kaufman prosthesis was 50% and that with the Scott artificial sphincter 91% with an average follow-up of 2 years. Mechanical complications or infection requiring surgical intervention occurred in 42% cases. Careful patient selection and meticulous surgical technique are essential. The artificial urinary sphincter (type AMS 800) appears to be the best treatment modality for urethral sphincter deficiency. In the selected cases the Kaufman prosthesis still has a place for the treatment of elderly men with poor cortical and manual control, making them incapable of managing the AMS 800 prosthesis.
Adult, Male, Prostatectomy, Silicones, Prostheses and Implants, Middle Aged, Prosthesis Design, Urinary Incontinence, Urethra, Humans, Female
Adult, Male, Prostatectomy, Silicones, Prostheses and Implants, Middle Aged, Prosthesis Design, Urinary Incontinence, Urethra, Humans, Female
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
