Do larger cuff sizes with artificial urinary sphincter placement increase the risk of leakage after placement?

INTRODUCTION

To determine whether larger artificial urinary sphincters (AUS) cuff sizes of ≥ 5.0 cm have an impact on urinary incontinence after AUS implantation as compared to cuff sizes ≤ 4.5 cm.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of AUS implants performed at our institution from 1991 to 2021. Medical records were reviewed for demographics including body mass index (BMI), cause of incontinence, pelvic radiation, valsalva leak point pressure (VLPP), degree of leakage preoperatively and at 1-year post-AUS surgery, AUS revisions, erosion rate and the need for adjunct medication postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 110 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 44 patients had an AUS cuff size of ≥ 5.0 cm and 66 patients had a cuff size ≤ 4.5 cm. After AUS implantation at 1 year both groups had a median pad use of 1 pad per day. Lastly, the erosion rate was higher in the ≤ 4.5 cm cuff group (7.7% vs. 2.4%) but this was not statically significant. In all cases (6 patients) of cuff erosion, each patient had been radiated.

CONCLUSION

AUS cuff sizes of ≥ 5.0 cm do not appear to have a negative impact on the degree of incontinence at 1-year post AUS as compared to those with cuff sizes ≤ 4.5 cm. The erosion rate was higher in those with cuffs ≤ 4.5 cm but was not statistically significant. This would suggest that at AUS implantation, the surgeon should choose a larger cuff if there is any doubt especially in those with radiation.