ArticleCureus2022
Outcomes of Initial Transcorporal Versus Standard Placement of Artificial Urinary Sphincter in Patients With Prior Radiation.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modifications of Anti-Incontinence Procedures for Radiated Patients: A Narrative Review.Current urology reports · 2026Review
- A call for evidence-based strategies in artificial urinary sphincter erosion management.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- The fragile urethra: what to do next?-a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Review
- Artificial urinary sphincter and stricture disease: surgical principles in management.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Review
- Surgical management of post prostatectomy incontinence.Prostate international · 2024Review
- Is the Standard Artificial Urinary Sphincter AMS 800 Still a Treatment Option for the Irradiated Male Patient Presenting with a Devastated Bladder Outlet?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Transalbugineal Artificial Urinary Sphincter: A Refined Implantation Technique to Improve Surgical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate both device and functional outcomes of men who underwent initial artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement after pelvic radiation using the transcorporal versus the standard approach.
methodsA retrospective review of patients who underwent first-time AUS placement after pelvic irradiation for prostate cancer was conducted between January 2008 and June 2020. Patients were grouped by transcorporal versus standard device placement. The primary outcomes of interest included major complications (revision or explant surgery) and functional outcomes (pads per day, International Prostate Symptom Score {IPSS}, quality of life {QOL} score).
resultsWe identified 45 patients who underwent first-time AUS with a history of prior pelvic irradiation for prostate cancer, 27 underwent transcorporal placement and 18 underwent standard placement. Transcorporal AUS placement resulted in a significantly lower number of major complications (p=0.01), explants (p=0.02), and revisions (p=0.04) The transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter group had better postoperative pads per day (p=0.04), IPSS (p<0.01), and IPSS QOL score (p<0.01).
conclusionsInitial transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter placement is a promising technique with lower rates of major complications in patients with a history of prior pelvic radiation and had better functional urinary outcomes.
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.