Home > Journals > Minerva Urology and Nephrology > Past Issues > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 December;72(6) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 December;72(6):770-7

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE   Freefree

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2020 December;72(6):770-7

DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.19.03457-X

Copyright © 2019 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Implant of ATOMS® system for the treatment of postoperative male stress urinary incontinence: an Italian multicentric study

Alessandro GIAMMÒ 1, Enrico AMMIRATI 1 , Annarita TULLIO 2, Giuseppe MORGIA 3, Sandro SANDRI 4, Carlo INTROINI 5, Giorgio CANEPA 5, Luca TIMOSSI 6, Cristina ROSSI 7, Cristina MOZZI 7, Roberto CARONE 1

1 CTO/Unipolar Spinal Cord Unit, Department of Neuro-Urology, Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy; 2 Department of Clinical Hygiene And Epidemiology, S. Maria della Misericordia University Hospital, Udine, Italy; 3 Department of Urology, Vittorio Emanuele University Hospital, Catania, Italy; 4 ASST Ovest Milanese, Fornaroli Hospital, Magenta, Milan, Italy; 5 Department of Urology, Galliera Hospitals, Genoa, Italy; 6 Department of Urology, International Evangelical Hospital of Genoa, Genoa, Italy; 7 Department of Urology, ASL Alessandria, San Giacomo Hospital, Novi Ligure, Alessandria, Italy



BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of the ATOMS system for the treatment of postoperative stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
METHODS: We included all consecutive male patients referring for postoperative SUI and treated with ATOMS system from June 2013 to July 2017. Patients received anamnesis, 24 h Pad Test, Pad count, physical examination, urodynamic evaluation, ICIQ-UI SF questionnaire. We excluded patients with low bladder capacity and compliance, uncontrolled detrusor overactivity.
RESULTS: We treated 98 patients with median age of 70.21±10.02 years. The most common cause of SUI was open radical prostatectomy in 79 patients. Ten patients had undergone urethrotomy, 7 bladder neck incision, 14 adjuvant radiotherapy. Thirty-nine patients suffered of mild incontinence (24 h Pad Test <200 g), 49 moderate incontinence (200-400 g), 10 severe incontinence (≥400 g). Thirty-one patients underwent previous incontinence surgery: 29 ProACT, 3 artificial urinary sphincters (in 2 cases both devices), 1 bulking agents and subsequent male sling. Median follow-up was 21.5 months. We had a significant reduction of mean 24 h Pads Test, pad count and ICIQ-UI SF questionnaire (P<0.01). At last follow-up 47.96% of patients were dry and 79.59% reached social continence. A high incontinence grade, adjuvant radiotherapy, previous urethral surgery and incontinence surgery have been associated with lower continence results. We had complications in 33 patients (33.7%). The device was removed in 4 cases due to scrotal port erosion and in one case due to persistent pain.
CONCLUSIONS: The ATOMS system seems to be an effective and safe surgical treatment for postoperative male SUI.


KEY WORDS: Urinary Incontinence, stress; Urologic surgical procedures, male; Urology

top of page