ArticleLower urinary tract symptoms2022
Is artificial urinary sphincter surgery safe and effective in elderly males aged 70 years and above?
Article in Lower urinary tract symptoms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Re: Camille Girard, Mehdi Al-Akri, Matthieu Durand, et al. Efficacy, Safety, and Reoperation-free Survival of Artificial Urinary Sphincter in Non-neurological Male Patients over 75 Years of Age. Eur Urol Open Sci 2023;53:23-30.European urology open science · 2023Article
- The impact of cognitive impairment in urologic implants: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2023Review
- Is artificial urinary sphincter surgery safe and effective in elderly males aged 70 years and above?Lower urinary tract symptoms · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction rate between men aged under and over 70 years who underwent artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) surgery.
methodsA prospective review of all men who received AUS between January 2008 and January 2018 was undertaken with a minimum 24-month review. All patient demographics and surgical outcomes including data on the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire, Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Frailty Index (NSQIP-FI) scores, as well as patient satisfaction rates, were recorded.
resultsOf the 245 AUS implanted, 60 patients were aged ≥70 years with 45 virgin cases and 15 revision AUS. Reduction in mean pad use and weight over 24 hours were significant at 0.21 (0-1) pads and 8 (0-30) g in both groups with no significant difference (P = 0.76). Kaplan-Meier estimates of AUS survival showed no significant difference between men aged ≥ and <70 years at 1 year (98% versus 96%; P = 0.44). The multivariate logistic regression model showed that radiation (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.8, 95% CI 1.4-6.8; P < 0.01) was a significant predictor of AUS revision, while age ≥ 70 years (adjusted OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.8-8.8; P = 0.14) and frailty (NSQIP-FI ≥ 0.27 adjusted OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.2-7.6; P = 0.82) were not. There were no significant differences in PGI-I scores (P = 0.43) and overall satisfaction rate (83% versus 84%; P = 0.44) between the two groups.
conclusionsMen aged ≥70 years reported similar clinical efficacy as men aged <70 years in terms of device survival and satisfaction rates following AUS surgery.
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.