ArticleAsian journal of urology2021
A comparison of artificial urinary sphincter outcomes after primary implantation and first revision surgery.
Article in Asian journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The electronic artificial urinary sphincter: ongoing innovation of a classic device-a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Review
- Artificial urinary sphincter erosion and infection: a contemporary review of perioperative considerations and management.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Review
- Surgical Management of Male Stress Incontinence: Techniques, Indications, and Pearls for Success.Research and reports in urology · 2023Review
- Long-Term Surveillance and Management of Urological Complications in Chronic Spinal Cord-Injured Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Characterizing patient experiences with repeat artificial urinary sphincter revisions through quantitative surveys and qualitative patient interviews.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
- Survival Without Reintervention of Second Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implants in Men: A National Healthcare Data System-Based Study in France.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard for severe male stress urinary incontinence, though evaluations of specific predictors for device outcomes are sparse. We sought to compare outcomes between primary and revision AUS surgery for non-infectious failures.
methodsWe identified 2045 consecutive AUS surgeries at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN, USA) from 1983 to 2013. Of these, 1079 were primary AUS implantations and 281 were initial revision surgeries, which comprised our study group. Device survival rates, including overall and specific rates for device infection/erosion, urethral atrophy and mechanical failure, were compared between primary AUS placements versus revision surgeries. Patient follow-up was obtained through office examination, written correspondence, or telephone correspondence.
resultsDuring the study period, 1079 (79.3%) patients had a primary AUS placement and 281 (20.7%) patients underwent a first revision surgery for mechanical failure or urethral atrophy. Patients undergoing revision surgery were found to have adverse 1- and 5-year AUS device survival on Kaplan-Meier analysis, 90%
conclusionsOur findings suggest a significantly higher rate of overall device failure following revision AUS surgery, which is likely secondary to an increased rate of infection/urethral erosion events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.