Outcomes of Bulbar Artificial Urinary Sphincter in Older Men following Prostate Cancer Treatment

Omar I1, Shah D2, Pati A1, Gresty H1, Noah A1, Nobrega R1, Pakzad M1, Ockrim J1, Greenwell T1

Research Type

Clinical

Abstract Category

Male Stress Urinary Incontinence (Post Prostatectomy Incontinence)

Abstract 354
Open Discussion ePosters
Scientific Open Discussion Session 5
Wednesday 27th September 2023
13:40 - 13:45 (ePoster Station 1)
Exhibit Hall
Male Incontinence Stress Urinary Incontinence Quality of Life (QoL)
1. University College London Hospital, 2. University College London
Presenter
Links

Abstract

Hypothesis / aims of study
Bulbar artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard for treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in men following treatment for prostate cancer (PCa). As our population ages, we must ensure efficacious solutions for older men with SUI post-PCa treatment is available. Occasionally, age could influence the decision of either offering by surgeons or accepting by patient to have such treatment. This would impact the quality of life in older population following prostate cancer treatment. 
We believe age should not be a factor in offering an AUS to patients with SUI post-PCa treatment. This study assessed whether age influenced the outcome of AUS for SUI post-PCa treatment.
Study design, materials and methods
A retrospective notes review of all patients having AUS for SUI following PCa treatment between 2006 and 2019. A 7-point Patient Global Impression of Improvement assessment (PGII) comparing pre-operative and post-operative condition (where 1: very much better, 4: the same and 7: very much worse) was completed for all patients a minimum of 6 months following insertion of their AUS. The AUS was deemed to have been successful if PGII was 1 or 2.
Older men were defined as those ≥ 75 years of age. Statistical analysis was done via Students T test, Chi Square and Mann Whitney with significance determined as P < 0.5
Results
A hundred and eighty four men who had AUS insertion for SUI post-PCa treatment were included in the study. Their median age was 69 years (range 31-87). Looking at their age, a hundred and fifty men were aged < 75 years and 35 were ≥ 75 years. Patients had had prior prostatectomy and/or radiotherapy treatments for their prostate cancer.

The results showed a median PGII score of 2 for both age groups and no significant difference in overall AUS success (%).

The over all median PGII score was 2 (range 1-7).

The success rate was 110 (73.3%) in men younger than 75 years of age, compared to 25 patient (73.5%) in the above 75 years cohort. 

The  over all AUS success was 73.5%, a total of 135 men. 

Results listed in Table 1:
Interpretation of results
Bulbar AUS has an overall success rate of 73.4%, which was described as ‘very much improved’ or ‘much improved’ condition with a minimum of 6 months after insertion.
There was no significant difference noted in the success rate between older and younger men
Concluding message
Older age in men with post-prostatectomy incontinence should not be a deterrent to offering AUS surgery
Figure 1
Disclosures
Funding None Clinical Trial No Subjects None
14/07/2025 22:13:33