ArticleBJU international2025
Outcomes of the Victo™ adjustable artificial urinary sphincter in the treatment of male incontinence.
Article in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Surgical Technique: Evolving Strategies to Reduce Urinary Incontinence After Radical Prostatectomy.Current urology reports · 2026Article
- A Comprehensive Review of Artificial Urinary Sphincters: History, Current Utilization, and Future Innovations.Current urology reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo report the clinical outcomes of the Victo™ (Promedon, Cordoba, Argentina) adjustable artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in a cohort of patients with severe urinary incontinence (UI) after prostate surgery. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis study enrolled patients with UI following prostate surgery who underwent a Victo implantation between May 2018 and December 2023. Patients were prospectively evaluated at baseline, and at 3 and 12 months after device activation, and thereafter annually. The 24-h pad-weight test (24hPWT) was used to assess severity of UI, while the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) and patient satisfaction according to a Likert scale were used to measure patient-reported outcomes.
resultsA total of 96 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 68 (65-72) years were included in the final analysis. The median (IQR) follow-up was 3 (1-4) years. In all, 10 patients completed the 5-year follow-up. After the treatment, we observed a significant reduction in 24hPWT by the median of 83% (P < 0.001) at 3 months and by a median of 79% (P < 0.001) at 3 years. According to the PGI-I, a total of 87%, 92%, 87%, 81%, 83%, and 50% (five of 10) of patients rated their condition/incontinence as 'very much improved', 'much improved' or 'little improved' at 3 months, 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year follow-up visits, respectively. The proportion of patients, who were 'very satisfied' or 'satisfied' with the treatment outcome was 79%, 80%, 75%, 69%, 80%, and 60% (six of 10) at 3 months, 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-years, respectively. There were a total of 13 (14%) device failures during the follow-up period.
conclusionIn conclusion, our data suggest that Victo AUS significantly reduces the severity of UI after prostate surgery and provides a reasonably high patient-reported satisfaction with treatment outcomes at mid-term follow-up.
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.