Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rektumperforation als Spätkomplikation einer ProACT-Implantation

Rectal perforation as a late complication of ProACT implantation

  • Kasuistiken
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Operative Therapieoptionen einer schweren Stressinkontinenz nach radikaler Prostatovesikulektomie umfassen artifizielle Sphinkteren, „bulking agents“, suburethrale Schlingen sowie das ProACT™-System (Uromedica Inc.). Als Komplikationen des ProACT-Verfahrens wurden Ballonrupturen, Ballondislokationen sowie Erosionen und Perforationen von Blase und Urethra beschrieben. Wir berichten über eine Rektumperforation als Spätkomplikation einer ProACT-Implantation nach radikaler Prostatovesikulektomie und adjuvanter Radiatio. Soweit wir wissen, dürfte es sich dabei um die Erstbeschreibung dieser Komplikation handeln.

Abstract

Operative approaches to solve severe urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy include artificial urinary sphincters, bulking agents, urethral sling procedures, and the ProACT device (Uromedica Inc.). Previously reported complications of the ProACT procedure comprise ruptures and dislocations of balloons as well as erosions and perforations of the bladder or urethra. We report the case of a rectal perforation as a late complication of the ProACT procedure after prostatectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy. To the best of our knowledge this complication has not been described before.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3

Literatur

  1. Castle EP, Andrews PE, Itano N et al. (2005) The male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence: mean followup of 18 months. J Urol 173: 1657–1660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cespedes RD (2000) Collagen injection or artificial sphincter for postprostatectomy incontinence: collagen. Urology 55: 5–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gundian JC, Barrett DM, Parulkar BG (1989) Mayo Clinic experience with use of the AMS800 artificial urinary sphincter for urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 142: 1459–1461

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hubner WA, Schlarp OM (2005) Treatment of incontinence after prostatectomy using a new minimally invasive device: adjustable continence therapy. BJU Int 96: 587–594

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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: 418–424

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Peyromaure M, Ravery V, Boccon-Gibod L (2002) The management of stress urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 90: 155–161

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Stern JA, Clemens JQ, Tiplitsky SI et al. (2005) Long-term results of the bulbourethral sling procedure. J Urol 173: 1654–1656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Venn SN, Greenwell TJ, Mundy AR (2000) The long-term outcome of artificial urinary sphincters. J Urol 164: 702–706

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Es besteht kein Interessenkonflikt. Der korrespondierende Autor versichert, dass keine Verbindungen mit einer Firma, deren Produkt in dem Artikel genannt ist, oder einer Firma, die ein Konkurrenzprodukt vertreibt, bestehen. Die Präsentation des Themas ist unabhängig und die Darstellung der Inhalte produktneutral.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urologische Klinik und Hochschulambulanz, Charité, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Universitätsmedizin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12200, Berlin

    C. Kempkensteffen, S. Hinz, F. Christoph, S. Weikert, M. Schrader & M. Schostak

Authors
  1. C. Kempkensteffen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Hinz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. F. Christoph
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Weikert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Schrader
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M. Schostak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Kempkensteffen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kempkensteffen, C., Hinz, S., Christoph, F. et al. Rektumperforation als Spätkomplikation einer ProACT-Implantation. Urologe 45, 865–867 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-006-1053-3

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-006-1053-3

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation