Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 1439–1446 | Cite as

Urethral lumen occlusion by artificial sphincteric devices: a computational biomechanics approach

  • Arturo Nicola Natali
  • Emanuele Luigi Carniel
  • Chiara Giulia Fontanella
  • Silvia Todros
  • Giulia Maria De Benedictis
  • Maria Angela Cerruto
  • Walter Artibani
Original Paper
  • 124 Downloads

Abstract

The action induced by artificial sphincteric devices to provide urinary continence is related to the problem of evaluating the interaction between the occlusive cuff and the urethral duct. The intensity and distribution of the force induced within the region of application determine a different occlusion process and potential degradation of the urethral tissue, mostly at the borders of the cuff. This problem is generally considered in the light of clinical and surgical operational experience, while a valid cooperation is established with biomechanical competences by means of experimental and numerical investigation. A three-dimensional model of the urethra is proposed aiming at a representation of the phases of the urethral occlusion through artificial sphincters. Different conformations of the cuff are considered, mimicking different loading conditions in terms of force intensity and distribution and consequent deformation caused in soft tissues. The action induced in the healthy urethra is investigated, as basis for an evaluation of the efficacy and reliability of the sphincteric devices. The problem is characterized by coupled nonlinear geometric and material problem and entails a complex constitutive formulation. A heavy computational procedure is developed by means of analyses that operate within an explicit finite element formulation. Results reported outline the overall response of the urethral duct during lumen occlusion, leading to an accurate description of the phenomenon in the different phases.

Keywords

Urological biomechanics Urethral duct Artificial sphincter Non linear tissue mechanics Finite element models 

References

  1. Aagaard M, Klarskov N, Sønksen J, Bagi P, Colstrup H, Lose G (2012) Urethral pressure reflectometry; a novel technique for simultaneous recording of pressure and cross-sectional area: a study of feasibility in the prostatic urethra. BJU Int 110:1178–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belytschko T, Bindeman LP (1992) Assumed strain stabilization of the eight node hexahedral element. Comput Method Appl M 105:225–260CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Bush MB, Liedl B, Wagenlehner F, Petros P (2015) A finite element model validates an external mechanism for opening the urethral tube prior to micturition in the female. World J Urol 33:1151–1157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cavalcanti AG, Costa WS, Baskin LS, McAninch JA, Sampaio FJ (2007) A morphometric analysis of bulbar urethral strictures. BJU Int 100:397–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen J, Ahmad R, Li W, Swain M, Li Q (2015) Biomechanics of oral mucosa. J R Soc Interface 12:20150325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chung E (2014) A state-of-the-art review on the evolution of urinary sphincter devices for the treatment of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: past, present and future innovations. J Med Eng Technol 38:328–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cordon BH, Singla N, Singla AK (2016) Artificial urinary sphincters for male stress urinary incontinence: current perspectives. Med Dev 9:175–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dubbelman YD, Groen J, Wildhagen MF, Rikken B, Bosch JL (2012) Urodynamic quantification of decrease in sphincter function after radical prostatectomy: relation to postoperative continence status and the effect of intensive pelvic floor muscle exercises. Neurourol Urodyn 31:646–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gousse AE, Madjar S, Lambert MM, Fishman IJ (2001) Artificial urinary sphincter for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: long-term subjective results. J Urol 166:1755–1758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hudak SJ, Morey AF (2011) Impact of 3.5 cm artificial urinary sphincter cuff on primary and revision surgery for male stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 186:1962–1966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hussain M, Greenwell TJ, Venn SN, Mundy AR (2005) The current role of the artificial urinary sphincter for the treatment of urinary incontinence. J Urol 174:418–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Idzenga T, Arif M, van Mastrigt R, de Korte CL (2015) Noninvasive estimation of the pressure profile in the male urethra using ultrasound imaging. Med Phys 42:1745–1752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Landefeld CS, Bowers BJ, Feld AD, Hartmann KE, Hoffman E, Ingber MJ, King JT, McDougal WS, Nelson H, Orav EJ, Pignone M, Richardson LH, Rohrbaugh RM, Siebens HC, Trock BJ (2008) National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science conference statement: prevention of fecal and urinary incontinence in adults. Ann Intern Med 148:449–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lee R, Te AE, Kaplan SA, Sandhu JS (2009) Temporal trends in adoption of and indications for the artificial urinary sphincter. J Urol 181:2622–2627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leo ME, Barrett DM (1993) Success of the narrow-backed cuff design of the AMS800 artificial urinary sphincter: analysis of 144 patients. J Urol 150:1412–1414Google Scholar
  16. Light JK, Reynolds JC (1992) Impact of the new cuff design on reliability of the AS800 artificial urinary sphincter. J Urol 147:609–611Google Scholar
  17. Markland AD, Goode PS, Redden DT, Borrud LG, Burgio KL (2010) Prevalence of urinary incontinence in men: results from the national health and nutrition examination survey. J Urol 184:1022–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Marti F, Leippold T, John H, Blunschi N, Müller B (2006) Optimization of the artificial urinary sphincter: modelling and experimental validation. Phys Med Biol 51:1361–1374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mescher AL (2015) Junqueira’s basic histology: text and atlas, 14th edn. McGraw-Hill Education, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Natali AN, Carniel EL, Fontanella CG, Frigo A, Todros S, Rubini A, De Benedictis GM (2016a) Mechanics of the urethral duct: tissue constitutive formulation and structural modeling for the investigation of lumen occlusion. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. doi:10.1007/s10237-016-0828-8
  21. Natali AN, Carniel EL, Frigo A, Pavan PG, Todros S, Pachera P, Fontanella CG, Rubini A, Cavicchioli L, Avital Y, De Benedictis GM (2016b) Experimental investigation of the biomechanics of urethral tissues and structures. Exp Physiol 101:641–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pavlica P, Barozzi L, Mecnhi I (2003) Imaging of male urethra. Eur Radiol 13:1583–1596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Prinz JF, de Wijk RA, Huntjens L (2007) Load dependency of the coefficient of friction of oral mucosa. Food Hydrocoll 21:402–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Puso MA (2000) A highly efficient enhanced assumed strain physically stabilized hexahedral element. Int J Numer Methods Eng 49:1029–1064CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Raub CB, Mahon S, Narula N, Tromberg BJ, Brenner M, George SC (2010) Linking optics and mechanics in an in vivo model of airway fibrosis and epithelial injury. J Biomed Opt 15:015004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schreiter F (2005) Artificial urinary sphincter: bladder neck, bulbar, membranous, and double cuff implantation. In: Hohenfellner R, Fitzpatrick J, McAninch J (eds) Advanced urology surgery, 3rd edn. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, MaldenGoogle Scholar
  27. Scott FB, Bradley WE, Timm GW (1974) Treatment of urinary incontinence by an implantable prosthetic urinary sphincter. J Urol 167:1125–1129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Timm GW, Wulfman DR, Kim S, Hampton RE, Will S, DiCosimo J, Erdman AG (2005) Tissue characterization for improved external penile occlusive device design. J Biomech Eng 127:956–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yucel S, Baskin LS (2004) An anatomical description of the male and female urethral sphincter complex. J Urol 171:1890–1897CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arturo Nicola Natali
    • 1
    • 2
  • Emanuele Luigi Carniel
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chiara Giulia Fontanella
    • 2
    • 3
  • Silvia Todros
    • 1
    • 2
  • Giulia Maria De Benedictis
    • 2
    • 4
  • Maria Angela Cerruto
    • 5
  • Walter Artibani
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringUniversity of PadovaPadovaItaly
  2. 2.Centre for Mechanics of Biological MaterialsUniversity of PadovaPadovaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Biomedical SciencesUniversity of PadovaPadovaItaly
  4. 4.Department of Animal Medicine, Production and HealthUniversity of PadovaPadovaItaly
  5. 5.Urology ClinicVerona Integrated University HospitalVeronaItaly

Personalised recommendations