Objectives: The study aims to investigate and evaluate the influence of 2 different methods of implantation of the Argus transobturator (Argus-T) adjustable male sling on complication rate and short-term efficacy. Methods: A prospective mono-center evaluation was conducted on consecutive patients treated for persistent post-radical prostatectomy incontinence. Thirty-six patients were implanted with the Argus-T adjustable male sling - 18 by inguinal-perineal incision (IPI) and 18 by single-perineal incision (SPI). Measurements included 24-hour frequency volume micturition list, 24-hour pad test, 24-hour pad count, Visual Analogue Scale for continence and satisfaction, flowmetry and residual voided urine. Results: Cure rate for IPI and SPI at 1, 6 and 12 months was 67, 75, 62% and 59, 63, 63%, respectively (no statistically significant difference). Although more clinically significant complications were seen in the IPI group, a statistical significant difference was observed only for wound infection between the IPI and the SPI groups (33 vs. 0%, p = 0.019). Conclusions: The Argus-T male sling SPI suspension operation is a minimally invasive and safe procedure for the management of male postoperative stress incontinence which is highly appreciated by the patients.

Keywords:
Male sling, Post-radical prostatectomy incontinence , Single incision, Stress urinary incontinence, Transobturator sling suspension
1.
Van der Aa F, Drake MJ, Kasyan GR, Petrolekas A, Cornu JN; Young Academic Urologists Functional Urology Group: The artificial urinary sphincter after a quarter of a century: a critical systematic review of its use in male non-neurogenic incontinence. Eur Urol 2013;63:681-689.
2.
Welk BK, Herschorn S: The male sling for post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a review of contemporary sling designs and outcomes. BJU Int 2012;109:328-344.
3.
Bauer RM, Bastian PJ, Gozzi C, Stief CG: Postprostatectomy incontinence: all about diagnosis and management. Eur Urol 2009;55:322-333.
4.
Kumar A, Litt ER, Ballert KN, Nitti VW: Artificial urinary sphincter versus male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence - what do patients choose? J Urol 2009;181:1231-1235.
5.
Holm HV, Fosså SD, Hedlund H, Schultz A, Dahl AA: How should continence and incontinence after radical prostatectomy be evaluated? A prospective study of patient ratings and changes with time. J Urol 2014;192:1155-1161.
6.
Cornel EB, Elzevier HW, Putter H: Can advance transobturator sling suspension cure male urinary postoperative stress incontinence? J Urol 2010;183:1459-1463.
7.
Bochove-Overgaauw DM, Schrier BP: An adjustable sling for the treatment of all degrees of male stress urinary incontinence: retrospective evaluation of efficacy and complications after a minimal followup of 14 months. J Urol 2011;185:1363-1368.
8.
Tsui JF, Shah MB, Weinberger JM, Ghanaat M, Weiss JP, Purohit RS, Blaivas JG: Pad count is a poor measure of the severity of urinary incontinence. J Urol 2013;190:1787-1790.
9.
Van Bruwaene S, Ridder de D, van der Aa F: The use of sling vs sphincter in post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence. BJU Int 2015;116:330-342.
10.
Dylewski DA, Jamison MG, Borawski KM, Sherman ND, Amundsen CL, Webster GD: A statistical comparison of pad numbers versus pad weights in the quantification of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2007;26:3-7.
11.
Wallerstedt A, Carlsson S, Nilsson AE, Johansson E, Nyberg T, Steineck G, Wiklund NP: Pad use and patient reported bother from urinary leakage after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2012;187:196-200.
12.
Gill BC, Swartz MA, Klein JB, Rackley RR, Montague DK, Vasavada SP, Angermeier KW: Patient perceived effectiveness of a new male sling as treatment for post-prostatectomy incontinence. J Urol 2010;183:247-252.
13.
Herschorn S, Bruschini H, Comiter C, Grise P, Hanus T, Kirschner-Hermanns R, Abrams P; Committee of the International Consultation on Incontinence: Surgical treatment of stress incontinence in men. Neurourol Urodyn 2010;29:179-190.
14.
Leruth J, de Leval J, Waltregny D: The inside-out transobturator male sling for the surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: midterm results of a single-center prospective study. Eur Urol 2012;61:608-615.
15.
Bauer RM, Rutkowski M, Kretschmer A, Casuscelli J, Stief CG, Huebner W: Efficacy and complications of the adjustable sling system ArgusT for male incontinence: results of a prospective 2-center study. Urology 2015;85:316-320.
16.
Romano SV, Huebner W, Rocha FT, Vaz FP, Muller V, Nakamura F: A transobturator adjustable system for male incontinence: 30-month follow-up of a multicenter study. Int Braz J Urol 2014;40:781-789.
17.
Vainrib M, Reyblat P, Ginsberg D: Outcomes of male sling mesh kit placement in patients with neuropathic stress urinary incontinence: a single institution experience. Urol Int 2015;95:406-410.
18.
Bauer RM, Gozzi C, Roosen A, Khoder W, Trottmann M, Waidelich R, Stief CG, Soljanik I: Impact of the ‘repositioning test' on postoperative outcome of retroluminar transobturator male sling implantation. Urol Int 2013;90:334-338.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel
2016
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.