Device Survival after Primary Implantation of an Artificial Urinary Sphincter for Male Stress Urinary Incontinence

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid



The AMS 800™ artificial urinary sphincter remains the gold standard for the surgical management of male stress urinary incontinence. We reviewed artificial urinary sphincter device survival after primary implantation.

Materials and Methods:

Retrospective data were collected from the AMS 800 patient information form database. Since 1972, 77,512 patient information forms for primary artificial urinary sphincter implantation have been completed in the United States. Following exclusion of procedures performed in children and females, and those labeled with an unknown surgical technique, 27,096 artificial urinary sphincter cases were included in the analysis. Collected variables included patient age, surgical approach, number of cuffs and surgeon volume. Measured outcomes included device explantation, device revision, component revision and time to each event.


Artificial urinary sphincter insertion was performed by low volume implanters in 22,165 (82.6%) cases. The approach was perineal in 18,373 cases (67.8%) and a tandem cuff was used in 2,224 cases (8.2%). Overall 5,723 cases required revision or explantation (21.1%). Younger age and penoscrotal approach were associated with higher device explantation and revision rates, while the use of a tandem cuff was associated with higher explantation rates. On multivariate analysis younger age, penoscrotal approach and use of a tandem cuff but not surgeon volume were significant factors associated with device explantation and component revision.


These data provide a general overview of artificial urinary sphincter device survival and may serve urologists when counseling patients. Younger age, penoscrotal approach and use of a tandem cuff may be associated with inferior outcomes.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles