biostudies-literatureUnknown9(5)Punjani N<h4>Background</h4>To describe a large series of male patients who underwent a minimally invasive single perineal incision artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement in patients with stress urinary incontinence.<h4>Methods</h4>A retrospective cohort study was performed with data collected from men undergoing AUS placement by a single high-volume surgeon over a 12-year period (2005 to 2017). Demographic and outcomes data related to AUS placement were recorded from electronic medical records, which included subjective histories and questionnaires. Institutional ethics approval was received.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 145 AUS were placed over the study period. Of these, 84 were performed through a single perineal incision for both device and reservoir placement. Almost all (n=81, 96%) reported pre-operative incontinence of more than 3 pads per day. Postoperatively, 75% were satisfied with their continence, with 21 (25%) complaining of recurrent incontinence. A total of 5 (6%) patients developed a post-operative infection, 10 (12%) had device erosion and 11 (13%) had device malfunction, but only 3 (4%) had reservoir dysfunction. A total of 24 (29%) patients required revision of their device at median of 20 months (IQR, 6-32.5 months).<h4>Conclusions</h4>Single perineal incision is a feasible, safe, and potentially superior approach for AUS placement and warrants consideration as an accepted approach due to its more rapid surgical times, lower morbidity related to a single incision with minimal fascial defect, and favorable complication rates.Translational andrology and urology1912-1919https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC7658167biostudies-literatureSingle perineal incision for artificial urinary sphincter: analysis of technique, outcomes, and experience.PMC7658167Brock GChan GCampbell JAbed HPunjani NChan EfalseSingle perineal incision for artificial urinary sphincter: analysis of technique, outcomes, and experience.<h4>Background</h4>To describe a large series of male patients who underwent a minimally invasive single perineal incision artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement in patients with stress urinary incontinence.<h4>Methods</h4>A retrospective cohort study was performed with data collected from men undergoing AUS placement by a single high-volume surgeon over a 12-year period (2005 to 2017). Demographic and outcomes data related to AUS placement were recorded from electronic medical records, which included subjective histories and questionnaires. Institutional ethics approval was received.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 145 AUS were placed over the study period. Of these, 84 were performed through a single perineal incision for both device and reservoir placement. Almost all (n=81, 96%) reported pre-operative incontinence of more than 3 pads per day. Postoperatively, 75% were satisfied with their continence, with 21 (25%) complaining of recurrent incontinence. A total of 5 (6%) patients developed a post-operative infection, 10 (12%) had device erosion and 11 (13%) had device malfunction, but only 3 (4%) had reservoir dysfunction. A total of 24 (29%) patients required revision of their device at median of 20 months (IQR, 6-32.5 months).<h4>Conclusions</h4>Single perineal incision is a feasible, safe, and potentially superior approach for AUS placement and warrants consideration as an accepted approach due to its more rapid surgical times, lower morbidity related to a single incision with minimal fascial defect, and favorable complication rates.2020-01-01T00:00:00Z2020 Oct2025-04-19T23:39:34.781Z2025-04-19T23:39:34.781ZS-EPMC76581673320965510.21037/tau-20-508