AIM OF THE STUDY: To report clinical experience and economical aspects concerning the use of a peri-urethral constrictor for the treatment of male urinary incontinence after surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve patients were treated with the periurethral constrictor Vedise. They previously underwent prostate surgery and reported persistent urinary incontinence, subjectively judged as disabling. In all the cases at least 18 months had elapsed from the date of the previous operation to the date of observation.
RESULTS: No complications were observed during the application of the device, nor during the first postoperative period; the patients were discharged on the first postoperative day. In two patients the failure of the device was observed with immediate reappearance of urinary losses due to damage of the balloon during the activation procedure. In these cases it was necessary to replace the balloon with subsequent reactivation of the device. In a third patient the detachment of the tubing connecting the cup with the balloon was reported and finally in a fourth patient a tight recurrent urethral stricture requested the removal of the device. The remaining patients, followed up for about 12 months after the implantation, considered the application of the device as a positive experience, would recommend it to other patients and would repeat the implantation, if required.
CONCLUSIONS: The relevance of the preliminary selection of the patients and the need for meticulous attention during installation an activation of the device is stressed and possible modification of the device are suggested to increase both effectiveness and ease of use.
Written by:
De Giovanni L, Stefanucci M, Menchinelli P. Are you the author?
Divisione di Chirurgia Urologica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Complesso Integrato Columbus, Roma, Italy.
Reference: Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2012 Sep;84(3):155-7.
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 23210409
UroToday.com Urinary Incontinence Section
