Periurethral constrictor: late results of the treatment of post prostatectomy urinary incontinence

• Autor(a) principal: Lima,Roberto S.
• Data de Publicação: 2011
• Outros Autores: Barros,Evandilson G. C., Souza,Carlos A., Vilar,Fábio de O., Lima,Salvador Vilar C.
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: International Braz J Urol (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382011000400007
• topic: urinary incontinence; prostatectomy; prostate; prosthesis implantation; adverse effects

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated retrospectively, the long-term outcome of patients with post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPUI) after placement of the Periurethral Constrictor (PUC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-six men with severe PPUI were studied, with a mean age of 68.5 years old. Fifty-one men had PPUI due to radical surgery having the device placed around the bulbous urethra, and five individuals with benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) had placement around the bladder neck. The mean follow-up was 82.2 months. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (39.28%) became continent (0 to 1 pad a day) and 34 (60.72%) were incontinent. Complications were as follows: urethral erosion in 15 (26.78%); mechanical malfunction in 2 (3.5%); infection in 2 (3.5%); urinary fistula in 1 (1.7%); Urinary tract infection1 (1.7%). Twenty-three patients needed to have the device removed (41.07%). Success rate (continent me) was 30.35%. CONCLUSION: In the present series the PUC was not effective for the treatment of severe PPUI in the long-term follow-up.