New technique of robot-assisted laparoscopic artificial urinary sphincter implantation in female by a posterior approach with intraoperative cystoscopic monitoring

• Published in: World journal of urology 2021-11, Vol.39 (11), p.4221-4226
• Main Authors: Broudeur, L., Loubersac, T., Le Normand, L., Karam, G., Branchereau, J., Rigaud, J., Perrouin-Verbe, M. A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Bladder; Cystoscopy; Dissection; Early experience; Female; Humans; Injuries; Intraoperative Complications - epidemiology; Intraoperative Complications - prevention & control; Laparoscopy; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Middle Aged; Monitoring, Intraoperative - methods; Nephrology; Oncology; Original Article; Patients; Prosthesis Implantation - methods; Retrospective Studies; Robotic surgery; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Robots; Sphincter; Urinary Incontinence, Stress - surgery; Urinary Sphincter, Artificial; Urology; Vagina
• ISSN: 0724-4983; 1433-8726
• DOI: 10.1007/s00345-021-03739-w

Purpose To report the early experience of a modified technique of robot-assisted artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation in female, with a posterior approach to the bladder neck and intraoperative real-time cystoscopic monitoring. Methods Retrospective monocentric study included all consecutive female who underwent a primary robot-assisted AUS implantation between 2017 and 2019. Real-time intraoperative cystoscopic monitoring was carried out to check the correct level of the dissection and to avoid any injury during bladder neck dissection. Perioperative and intraoperative data, functional outcomes and complications were assessed. Continence was defined as 0 to 1 pad per day. Results Twenty-four patients were included, the median age was 66 years, 23/24 (96%) had previous SUI or prolapse surgery. Two conversions to open surgery and 2 modifications of the surgical technique with anterior dissection of the bladder neck were required due to major vesicovaginal adhesions. Overall, 20 patients underwent the robotic posterior approach. Eleven intraoperative complications in 10 patients (50%) occurred, including 7 bladder injuries 4 vaginal injuries, without the need to stop the procedure. The median hospital stay was 3 days (2–7). One AUS was removed at 1 year due to vaginal erosion. At last follow-up (median 26 months (22–36)), 95% of the devices were in place and activated and the continence rate was 84%. Conclusions Early functional results of robot-assisted AUS implantation with a posterior approach to the bladder neck and intraoperative cystoscopic monitoring are promising despite the high rate of intraoperative complications due to previous surgeries. Further evaluation of this technique is required.