Translational andrology and urology · 2023
Artificial urinary sphincter and female stress urinary incontinence over the past 50 years: a narrative review.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Madanelo Mariana, Chartier-Kastler Emmanuel, Greenwell Tamsin, Gray Gary, Khavari Rose, Van Koeveringe Gommert A, Van Der Aa Frank, Peyronnet Benoit
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present report was to provide an overview of the use of the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in adult females with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) over the past 50 years.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted in December 2022 and January 2023 using the MEDLINE and Embase databases, screening for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective series and reviews on AUS. Only articles published in English or French were included. The search strategy involved a free text protocol and the narrative review reporting checklist was completed.
KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: The AUS is a device used over the past 50 years for SUI caused by intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD). It has the theoretical ability to simulate the function of a biological urinary sphincter. Although the role of the AUS for females with ISD remains heterogeneous from one part of the world to the other, the existing literature demonstrates that AUS yields satisfactory functional outcomes in female SUI patients, comparable or better to what has been reported in male AUS series. Hence, the main barrier to its adoption has so far been the technical challenge of its implantation at the bladder neck. Regarding the results of AUS implantation in females, we included in this review 3 reviews, retrospective studies and 1 prospective study. In recent years, robotic techniques of female AUS implantation have spread significantly with promising outcomes including numerous reports suggesting that it may decrease its morbidity. In the near future, the development of electromechanical devices may further expand the role of AUS in the management of female SUI.
CONCLUSIONS: While the use of AUS in female patients provides excellent functional outcomes, it has been limited to scarce centers. However, due to the rise of minimally invasive approaches, it has started spreading again over the past few years. The future of AUS is likely to be bright, fed by technological advances of the device and robotic surgical system, high level of evidence studies and joint efforts of the urological community to facilitate its diffusion across the world.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted in December 2022 and January 2023 using the MEDLINE and Embase databases, screening for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective series and reviews on AUS. Only articles published in English or French were included. The search strategy involved a free text protocol and the narrative review reporting checklist was completed.
KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: The AUS is a device used over the past 50 years for SUI caused by intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD). It has the theoretical ability to simulate the function of a biological urinary sphincter. Although the role of the AUS for females with ISD remains heterogeneous from one part of the world to the other, the existing literature demonstrates that AUS yields satisfactory functional outcomes in female SUI patients, comparable or better to what has been reported in male AUS series. Hence, the main barrier to its adoption has so far been the technical challenge of its implantation at the bladder neck. Regarding the results of AUS implantation in females, we included in this review 3 reviews, retrospective studies and 1 prospective study. In recent years, robotic techniques of female AUS implantation have spread significantly with promising outcomes including numerous reports suggesting that it may decrease its morbidity. In the near future, the development of electromechanical devices may further expand the role of AUS in the management of female SUI.
CONCLUSIONS: While the use of AUS in female patients provides excellent functional outcomes, it has been limited to scarce centers. However, due to the rise of minimally invasive approaches, it has started spreading again over the past few years. The future of AUS is likely to be bright, fed by technological advances of the device and robotic surgical system, high level of evidence studies and joint efforts of the urological community to facilitate its diffusion across the world.