Open Access

ARTICLE

Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter cuff placement is associated with a higher risk of postoperative urinary retention

Paul J. Smith, Steven J. Hudak, J. Francis Scott, Lee C. Zhao, Allen F. Morey

Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA
Address correspondence to Dr. Allen F. Morey, UT Southwestern Department of Urology, Moss Bldg, 8^th Fl, Ste 112, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX 75390-9110 USA

Canadian Journal of Urology 2013, 20(3), 6773-6777.

Abstract

Introduction: To explore the association of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) cuff sizes and placement techniques with the development of postoperative urinary retention.
Materials and methods: We analyzed the outcomes of AUS cases performed by a single surgeon at a tertiary referral center from 2007 to 2010. Outcomes relating to urinary retention and suprapubic tube placement were analyzed in three groups: those with 3.5 cm cuff placement, ≥ 4 cm cuff placement, and transcorporal cuff (TC) placement of any size.
Results: Among 139 patients who underwent AUS placement from 2007 to 2010, 117 cases met inclusion criteria – 42 men received a 3.5 cm cuff, 53 received a ≥ 4 cm cuff, and 22 received a TC cuff (all ≥ 4 cm). TC patients had a significantly higher rate of urinary retention compared to the ≥ 4 cm group [7/22 (32%) versus 4/53 (8%), p = 0.02] as well as a higher rate of suprapubic tube (SPT) placement [6/22 (27%) versus 1/53 (2%), p = 0.007].
Conclusions: Transcorporal cuff placement is associated with a significantly higher rate of urinary retention and suprapubic tube placement compared to traditional 4 cm cuff placement.

---

Keywords

---