TY - JOUR
T1 - Fixed or adjustable sling in the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence
T2 - Results from a large cohort study
AU - Debates On Male Incontinence (DOMINO)-Project
AU - Hüsch, Tanja
AU - Kretschmer, Alexander
AU - Obaje, Alice
AU - Kirschner-Hermanns, Ruth
AU - Anding, Ralf
AU - Pottek, Tobias
AU - Rose, Achim
AU - Olianas, Roberto
AU - Friedl, Alexander
AU - Homberg, Roland
AU - Pfitzenmaier, Jesco
AU - Abdunnur, Rudi
AU - Queissert, Fabian
AU - Naumann, Carsten M.
AU - Schweiger, Josef
AU - Wotzka, Carola
AU - Nyarangi-Dix, Joanne
AU - Hofmann, Torben
AU - Ulm, Kurt
AU - Hübner, Wilhelm
AU - Bauer, Ricarda M.
AU - Haferkamp, Axel
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/6/1
Y1 - 2020/6/1
N2 - Background: Fixed and adjustable male slings for the treatment of male urinary stress incontinence became increasingly popular during the last decade. Although fixed slings are recommended for the treatment of mild to moderate stress urinary incontinence, there is still a lack of evidence regarding the precise indication for an adjustable male sling. Furthermore, there is still no evidence that one type of male sling is superior to another. However, both, adjustable and fixed slings, are commonly utilized in daily clinical practice. This current investigation aims to evaluate the differences between fixed and adjustable male slings regarding indications, complication rates and functional outcome in the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence in current clinical practice. Methods: A total of 294 patients with a fixed and 176 patients with an adjustable male sling were evaluated in a multicenter single arm cohort trial. Data collection was performed retrospectively according the medical record. Functional outcome was prospectively analyzed by standardized, validated questionnaires. Descriptive statistics was performed to present patient characteristics, complication rates and functional outcome. A chi2-test for categorical and independent t-test for continuous variables was performed to identify heterogeneity between the groups and to correlate preoperative characteristics with the outcome. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Patients with higher degree of urinary incontinence (P<0.001) and risk factors such as history of pelvic irradiation (P<0.001) or prior surgery for urethral stricture (P=0.032) were more likely to receive an adjustable MS. Complication rates were comparable except for infection (P=0.009, 0 vs. 2.3%) and pain (P=0.001, 1.7% vs. 11.3%) which occurred more frequently in adjustable slings. Functional outcome according validated questionnaires demonstrated no differences between fixed and adjustable male slings. Conclusions: Adjustable male slings are more frequently utilized in patients with higher degree of incontinence and risk factors compared to fixed slings. No differences could be identified between functional outcome which may imply an advantage for adjustability. However, pain and infection rates were significantly higher in adjustable MS and should be considered in the decision process for sling type.
AB - Background: Fixed and adjustable male slings for the treatment of male urinary stress incontinence became increasingly popular during the last decade. Although fixed slings are recommended for the treatment of mild to moderate stress urinary incontinence, there is still a lack of evidence regarding the precise indication for an adjustable male sling. Furthermore, there is still no evidence that one type of male sling is superior to another. However, both, adjustable and fixed slings, are commonly utilized in daily clinical practice. This current investigation aims to evaluate the differences between fixed and adjustable male slings regarding indications, complication rates and functional outcome in the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence in current clinical practice. Methods: A total of 294 patients with a fixed and 176 patients with an adjustable male sling were evaluated in a multicenter single arm cohort trial. Data collection was performed retrospectively according the medical record. Functional outcome was prospectively analyzed by standardized, validated questionnaires. Descriptive statistics was performed to present patient characteristics, complication rates and functional outcome. A chi2-test for categorical and independent t-test for continuous variables was performed to identify heterogeneity between the groups and to correlate preoperative characteristics with the outcome. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Patients with higher degree of urinary incontinence (P<0.001) and risk factors such as history of pelvic irradiation (P<0.001) or prior surgery for urethral stricture (P=0.032) were more likely to receive an adjustable MS. Complication rates were comparable except for infection (P=0.009, 0 vs. 2.3%) and pain (P=0.001, 1.7% vs. 11.3%) which occurred more frequently in adjustable slings. Functional outcome according validated questionnaires demonstrated no differences between fixed and adjustable male slings. Conclusions: Adjustable male slings are more frequently utilized in patients with higher degree of incontinence and risk factors compared to fixed slings. No differences could be identified between functional outcome which may imply an advantage for adjustability. However, pain and infection rates were significantly higher in adjustable MS and should be considered in the decision process for sling type.
KW - Adjustable male sling
KW - Fixed male sling
KW - Male
KW - Quality of life
KW - Stress urinary incontinence
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090095439&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.21037/tau-19-852
DO - 10.21037/tau-19-852
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85090095439
SN - 2223-4683
VL - 9
SP - 1099
EP - 1107
JO - Translational Andrology and Urology
JF - Translational Andrology and Urology
IS - 3
ER -