ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2025
The fate of the urethra after artificial urinary sphincter cuff erosion: a review of 98 patients.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Near-Obliterative Bulbar Urethral Stricture 12 Years After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Implantation: A Case Report.IJU case reports · 2026Article
- Natural history of artificial urinary sphincter cuff erosion in males: Experience from two tertiary centres in the United Kingdom.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Re: In situ urethroplasty at the time of artificial urinary sphincter explantation for urethral erosion: an 18-year single-center experience.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- A call for evidence-based strategies in artificial urinary sphincter erosion management.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cuff erosion following artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation, can have devastating downstream sequelae. As there is a paucity of literature regarding outcomes following AUS removal due to erosion, we aim to report rates of urinary fistulae (UF) and urethral stricture (US) complications after AUS removal in patients presenting with AUS cuff erosion. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients who underwent AUS explant due to erosion from July 2009 to December 2020 at University of Southern California/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center. All patients were managed with a standardized approach that involves prompt device explantation, suture urethrorraphy, and continual urethral catheter drainage. Patient demographic data, hypothesized cause of erosion, and post-operative outcomes were collated. Results: A total of 98 patients underwent AUS removal due to erosion. No intraoperative complications occurred during AUS explantation. The median age at AUS erosion was 79.4 years old [interquartile range (IQR), 72.7-83.1 years] with 45 (45.9%) of age 80 or greater. The median follow-up after AUS removal was 19.8 months (IQR, 7.0-49.2 months). Of these patients, 86 (87.8%) had a "fragile" urethra (history of pelvic radiotherapy, urethroplasty, or prior AUS failure or erosion) with 28 (28.6%) having two or more risk factors prior to AUS erosion at our institution. Fifty-three (54.1%) patients had history of pelvic radiation, 14 (14.3%) had a previous erosion, 6 (6.1%) had previous cuff relocation unrelated to erosion, and 6 (6.1%) had dual cuffs, 18 (18.4%) had a previous history of a posterior transecting urethroplasty, and 2 (2.0%) had a previous anterior urethroplasty. Of the 98 patients, 6 (6.1%) developed a Conclusions: In a contemporary cohort of patients presenting with AUS cuff erosion, rates of UCF and US are low. Due to the increassed risk of these complications after prior erosions, strategies to prevent initial erosion events should be further explored.
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.