Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Artifizieller Schließmuskel der Frau – zu selten?

Artificial urinary sphincter in women—too uncommon?

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Der artifizielle Schließmuskel (AUS) ist in der Kontinenztherapie des Mannes ein etablierter Standard, jedoch nicht bei der Frau. Vorgestellt werden in der Übersicht Möglichkeiten, Ergebnisse und Wertung der Anwendung des AUS bei Patientinnen mit Kontinenzbeschwerden.

Abstract

The artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is a well-known standard in the therapy of male incontinence, but not in females. This review highlights options, results, and a critical appraisal of the use of AUS in women.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3

Literatur

  1. Withington J, Hirji S, Sahai A (2014) The changing face of urinary continence surgery in England: a perspective from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. BJU Int 114:268–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Costa P, Poinas G, Naoum KB et al (2013) Long-term results of artificial urinary sphincter for women with type III stress urinary incontinence. Eur Urol 63:753–758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee R, Te AE, Kaplan SA, Sandhu JS (2009) Temporal trends in adoption of and indications for the artificial urinary sphincter. J Urol 181(6):2622–2627

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mandron E, Bryckaert P‑E, Papatsoris AG (2010) Laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter implantation for female genuine stress urinary incontinence: technique and 4‑year experience in 25 patients, Journal Complication. BJU Int 106:1194–1198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Marson F, Ammirati E, Guriolo A et al (2015) Female incontinence surgery: state of the art. Urologia 82(1):1–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Urinary incontinence in women: management, National Institute for health and care excellence, Clinical Guideline (CG171) Published date: Sept. 2013, last update: Nov. 2015

  7. Urinary incontinence in adults; EAU Guideline 2014, update Mar: 2016

  8. Reisenauer, C., Muche-Borowski, C., Anthuber, C., et al: Interdisziplinäre S2e-Leitlinie für die Diagnostik und Therapie der Belastungsinkontinenz der Frau; AWMF online Register Nr. 015/005

  9. Vayleux B, Rigaud J, Luyckx F et al (2011) Female urinary incontinence and artificial urinary sphincter: study of efficacy and risk factors for failure and complications. Eur Urol 59(1053):10–48

    Google Scholar 

  10. Peyronnet B, Belas O, Capon G et al (2017) Robot-assisted artificial urinary sphincter implantation in female patients: a multicenter study. Eur Urol Suppl 16(3):e1496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bugeja S, Ivaz S, Frost A, Dragova M et al (2017) Long term outcome following bladder neck artificial urinary sphincter implantation. Eur Urol Supp 16(3):e757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schick V (2005) Implantation of the AMS 800 artificial sphincter system in a woman via a paraurethral access. Urologe A 44(7):794–797

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Roupret M, Misrai V, Vaessen C et al (2010) Laparoscopic approach for artificial urinary sphincter implantation in woman with intrinsic sphincter deficiency incontinence: a single-centre preliminary experience. Eur Urol 57:499–505

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lipp A, Shaw C, Glavind K (2011) Mechanical devices for urinary incontinence in woman. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 10.1002/14651858.CD001756.pub5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Phe V, Roupret M, Mozer P, Chartier-Kastler E (2013) Trends in the landscape of artificial urinary sphincter implantation in men and women in France over the past decade. Eur Urol 63:404–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Urologie, Kliniken Maria Hilf GmbH, Viersener Str. 450, 41063, Mönchengladbach, Deutschland

    H. Sperling & M. Zaum

  2. Zentrum für Kontinenz und Neuro-Urologie, Kliniken Maria Hilf GmbH, Mönchengladbach, Deutschland

    A. Kaufmann & I. Bonn

Authors
  1. H. Sperling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Kaufmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. I. Bonn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Zaum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Sperling.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

H. Sperling hat Referentenhonorare von Boston Scientific erhalten, A. Kaufmann, I. Bonn und M. Zaum haben Fortbildungskosten von Boston Scientific erstattet bekommen.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sperling, H., Kaufmann, A., Bonn, I. et al. Artifizieller Schließmuskel der Frau – zu selten?. Urologe 56, 1572–1575 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-017-0527-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-017-0527-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation