International urology and nephrology · 2025
Factors influencing the choice of urethral slings over artificial sphincter for male stress urinary incontinence.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Boston Zachary, Jain Kunj, Choudhry Hassan, Pandher Meher, Popovic Aleksandar, Alwaal Amjad
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To examine the factors influencing urologists' decision to offer slings instead of AUS for managing male stress urinary incontinence.
METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database 2006-2021 was used to identify patients undergoing surgical procedures for male urinary incontinence using current procedural terminology (CPT) codes. The Current procedural terminology (CPT) codes for AUS (53,445) and male slings (53,440) were used to analyze the data appropriately. The cases with incomplete demographic data were excluded. Patient characteristics of interest were race, age, smoking status, obesity, HTN, COPD, ASA classification, use of glucocorticoids, history of cancer, and diabetes mellitus. Chi square and multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify significant predictors of outcomes. Significance was defined as p<0.05.
RESULTS: Among 4098 patients, 2407 underwent AUS implantation, and 1691 received a sling for male SUI. African American males were significantly more likely than Caucasian males to receive a sling (OR = 5.566, p < 0.05). The patients with comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, use of glucocorticoids, cancer, increased ASA, and history of DVTs are significantly more likely to undergo sling placement. COPD, congestive heart failure, and dialysis had no impact on the choice of male urinary incontinence management.
CONCLUSION: Male patients who are African American or have comorbidities such as history of diabetes, hypertension, cancer, DVT, and glucocorticoid use were more likely to be offered slings for stress urinary incontinence. These findings suggest a preference among urologists to recommend slings for patients with higher surgical risk profiles.
METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database 2006-2021 was used to identify patients undergoing surgical procedures for male urinary incontinence using current procedural terminology (CPT) codes. The Current procedural terminology (CPT) codes for AUS (53,445) and male slings (53,440) were used to analyze the data appropriately. The cases with incomplete demographic data were excluded. Patient characteristics of interest were race, age, smoking status, obesity, HTN, COPD, ASA classification, use of glucocorticoids, history of cancer, and diabetes mellitus. Chi square and multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify significant predictors of outcomes. Significance was defined as p<0.05.
RESULTS: Among 4098 patients, 2407 underwent AUS implantation, and 1691 received a sling for male SUI. African American males were significantly more likely than Caucasian males to receive a sling (OR = 5.566, p < 0.05). The patients with comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, use of glucocorticoids, cancer, increased ASA, and history of DVTs are significantly more likely to undergo sling placement. COPD, congestive heart failure, and dialysis had no impact on the choice of male urinary incontinence management.
CONCLUSION: Male patients who are African American or have comorbidities such as history of diabetes, hypertension, cancer, DVT, and glucocorticoid use were more likely to be offered slings for stress urinary incontinence. These findings suggest a preference among urologists to recommend slings for patients with higher surgical risk profiles.