Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Treatment of male stress urinary incontinence at time of inflatable penile prosthesis placement a review of contemporary literature.
Elbakry, Amr A; O'Connor, Luke P; Yafi, Faysal A; Barnard, John T.
Afiliación
  • Elbakry AA; Department of Urology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
  • O'Connor LP; Department of Urology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
  • Yafi FA; Department of Urology, University of California, Irvine School of Medicine, Orange, CA, USA.
  • Barnard JT; Department of Urology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Transl Androl Urol ; 13(2): 331-341, 2024 Feb 29.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38481860
ABSTRACT
Background and

Objective:

Male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and erectile dysfunction (ED) are well established diagnoses within Men's Health, often more specifically within the prostate cancer survivorship cohort. Taken individually, well defined treatment algorithms exist with which many surgeons are comfortable; however, treatment of both in a single setting or staged fashion introduces complexity. Emerging treatment options also exist, and there is immature or minimal data when these are combined with inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) insertion, radiation history, and/or variable degrees of incontinence. Our objective was to describe and summarize the currently available treatment options for SUI particularly at the time of IPP insertion.

Methods:

A literature review was performed to summarize contemporary treatment of SUI at time of IPP placement. Anecdotal experience was added from high volume, subspecialty trained Men's Health and Reconstructive Urologists. Key Content and

Findings:

Non-invasive approaches such as pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), behavioral modification, and external compression devices play some limited role in treatment and/or management of SUI, particularly in the early post operative period, or for those unwilling or unable to undergo more definitive intervention. More invasive options such as artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation, male sling, or other implantable devices are more appropriate for good surgical candidates with higher bother and/or more severe incontinence. These options can be concomitant or staged relative to IPP placement. Climacturia, particularly with mild or no bothersome SUI, can successfully be addressed at the time of penile prosthesis placement with the utilization of the Mini-Jupette suburethral sling.

Conclusions:

A variety of treatment options exist for concomitant treatment of SUI at time of IPP, and both safety and efficacy have been demonstrated for many in the same operative setting. As with treatment of ED or SUI in isolation, patient selection, careful counseling, and management of expectations can lead to high patient satisfaction.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Transl Androl Urol Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: China

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Transl Androl Urol Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: China