OBJECTIVE
To characterize the safety and practice patterns of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS)
placement on a population level. Increasingly AUS implantation has shifted to be an
outpatient surgery; however, there is a lack of large-scale research evaluating factors
associated with early (≤ 24 hours) versus late (>24 hours) discharges and complications
in men following AUS placement. We utilized the National Surgical Quality Improvement
Program (NSQIP) database to identify and compare factors and outcomes associated with
each approach.
METHODS
NSQIP database was queried for men undergoing AUS placement between 2007 and 2016.
Patients were classified as either early discharge (ED ≤ 24 hours) and late discharge
(LD > 24 hours). Baseline demographics, operating time, and complications were compared
between the 2 groups. Multivariate logistic regression evaluated factors associated
with discharge timing and 30-day complications.
RESULTS
A total of 1176 patients were identified and were classified as ED in 232 and LD in
944 patients. Operative time was shorter in ED (83 minutes) compared to LD (95 minutes,
P < .001). Hypertension was more prevalent among LD patients (60.3% vs 69.1% for ED
and LD respectively, P < .001). The 30-day complication rate was similar in both groups (ED: 4.3% vs LD:
3.4%, P = .498). Multivariable analysis revealed that surgery after 2012 was associated with
ED (OR = 3.66, P < .001).
CONCLUSION
At the national level, there are no differences in postoperative morbidity between
early and late discharges. There is a trend toward more ED, specifically after 2012.
A prospective study on the feasibility and safety of outpatient AUS is needed.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to UrologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Contemporary review of artificial urinary sphincters for male stress urinary incontinence.Sex Med Rev. 2016; 4: 157-166
- Comparison of complication rates related to male urethral slings and artificial urinary sphincters for urinary incontinence: national multi-institutional analysis of ACS-NSQIP database.Int Urol Nephrol. 2016; 48: 1571-1576
- Ambulatory surgery in the United States, 2006.Natl Health Stat Report. 2009; 28: 1-25
- Artificial urinary sphincter: lessons learned.Urol Clin North Am. 2011; 38 (vii): 83-88
- Artificial urinary sphincter: report of the 2015 consensus conference.Neurouol Urodyn. 2016; 35: S8-S24
- Surgical and patient reported outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter implantation: a multicenter, prospective, observational study.J Urol. 2018; 199: 245-250
- Perioperative complications following artificial urinary sphincter placement.J Urol. 2015; 194: 716-720
- Transcorporal artificial urinary sphincter cuff placement is associated with a higher risk of postoperative urinary retention.Can J Urol. 2013; 20: 6773-6777
- The artificial urinary sphincter in the management of incontinence.Urology. 2016; 92: 14-19
Wolf JS, Bennett CJ, Dmochowski RR, Hollenbeck BK, Pearle MS, Schaeffer AJ. AUA antimicrobial prophylaxis: best practice statement 2008 [updated 2012; cited 2020 May 3, 2020].
- Outcomes following erosions of the artificial urinary sphincter.J Urol. 2006; 175 (discussion 2190): 2186-2190
- Artificial urinary sphincter infection: causative organisms in a contemporary series.J Urol. 2008; 180: 2475-2478
- Long-term durability and functional outcomes among patients with artificial urinary sphincters: a 10-year retrospective review from the University of Michigan.J Urol. 2008; 179: 1912-1916
- Evaluation of factors and short-term postoperative morbidity associated with early versus late discharge following urethroplasty.Int Urol Nephrol. 2020; 52: 1279-1286
- Medicare payments for outpatient urological surgery by location of care.J Urol. 2012; 188: 2323-2327
- The affordable care act's impacts on access to insurance and health care for low-income populations.Annu Rev Public Health. 2017; 38: 489-505
- Analysis of hospital readmissions after prosthetic urologic surgery in the United States: nationally representative estimates of causes, costs, and predictive factors.J Sex Med. 2017; 14: 1059-1065
- Trends in the utilization of penile prostheses in the treatment of erectile dysfunction in the United States.J Sex Med. 2015; 12: 1638-1645
- Infection control in outpatient unicomponent penile prosthesis surgery.Int J Impot Res. 1999; 11: 25-27
- Outpatient inflatable penile prosthesis insertion.Urology. 1997; 49: 600-603
- Feasibility of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate as a 1-day surgery.World J Urol. 2020; 38: 1017-1025
- Holmium laser bladder neck incision versus holmium enucleation of the prostate as outpatient procedures for prostates less than 40 grams: a randomized trial.J Urol. 2005; 174: 210-214
- Safety and feasibility of outpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.J Robot Surg. 2019; 13: 261-265
- Perioperative mortality and morbidity of outpatient versus inpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity matched analysis.Urol Oncol. 2020; 38 (3 e1-3 e6)
- Artificial urinary sphincter for postradical prostatectomy urinary incontinence - is it the best option?.Int Neurourol J. 2019; 23: 265-276
- Treatment of urinary incontinence by implantable prosthetic sphincter.Urology. 1973; 1: 252-259
- Evaluating the role of postoperative oral antibiotic administration in artificial urinary sphincter and inflatable penile prosthesis explantation: a nationwide analysis.Urology. 2018; 111: 92-98
Article info
Publication history
Published online: October 16, 2020
Accepted:
July 29,
2020
Received:
June 1,
2020
Footnotes
Declarations of interest: None.
Identification
Copyright
Published by Elsevier Inc.