Current Update on Management of Male Stress Urinary Incontinence
- 21 Downloads
Purpose of Review
Male stress urinary incontinence has significant economic and psychosocial effects on a patient. The following manuscript examines the surgical treatment as well as the recent technological advances in implantable devices for male stress urinary incontinence.
The number of urethral slings available to the male patient with stress incontinence has increased dramatically over the last several years has increased. Since its introduction, the male transobturator sling has been shown to have particular unique advantages. Data is rapidly becoming available regarding the use of adjustable slings and the AdVanceXP male sling.
The artificial urinary sphincter remains the standard of care in the index patient with male stress urinary incontinence. Although management of this condition has improved dramatically over the past decade, large well-designed nonrandomized prospective studies are still needed to increase the level of evidence.
KeywordsMale stress urinary incontinence Male urethral sling Artificial urinary sphincter
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Dr. MacLachlan declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Dr. Mourtzinos reports that he has received speaker honorarium from Boston Scientific, Astellas, and Medtronic.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major Importance
- 11.•• Kretschmer A, Hubner W, Sandhu JS, et al. Evaluation and management of postprostatectomy incontinence: a systematic review of current literature. Eur Urol Focus. 2016;2:245–59. Although there have been several advances in the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence, no randomized controlled trial has yet investigated the outcome of one specific surgical treatment or compared the outcome of different surgical treatment options. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Chung E, Smith P, Malone G, Cartmill R. Adjustable versus non-adjustable male sling for post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a prospective clinical trial comparing patient choice, clinical outcomes and satisfaction rate with a minimum follow up of 24 months. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35:482–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 53.•• Biardeau X, Aharony S, AUS Consensus Group et al. Artificial urinary sphincter: report of the 2015 consensus conference. Neurourol Urodyn 2016;35 Suppl 2:S8–24. These guidelines constitute a reference document, which will help urologists to carefully select patients and apply the most adapted management to implantation, follow-up and trouble-shooting of the artificial urinary sphincter. Google Scholar
- 55.Rodriguez DA, Ascanio EF, Vicens VA et al. Four years experience with the FlowSecure Artificial Urinary Sphincter. Problems and solutions. In: Proceedings of the 41st annual meeting of the International Continence Society; Glasgow, UK; 2011.Google Scholar
- 69.Fuller TW, Ristau BT, Benoit RM. Simultaneous cuff revision and placement of an AdVance male sling for persistent post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence initially managed with AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter. Can J Urol. 2014;5:7507–9.Google Scholar