Comparison of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Before or After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement: A Multi-Institutional, Retrospective Analysis

Kenneth J. DeLay; Nora M. Haney; Jason Chiang; Carrie Stewart; Faysal A. Yafi; Kenneth Angermeier; Hadley Wood; Timothy Boone; Alex G. Kavanagh; Matthew Gretzer; Stuart Boyd; Jeffrey C. Loh-Doyle; Wayne J.G. Hellstrom

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.041

Comparison of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Before or After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement: A Multi-Institutional, Retrospective Analysis

Kenneth J. DeLay, Nora M. Haney, Jason Chiang, Carrie Stewart, Faysal A. Yafi, Kenneth Angermeier, Hadley Wood, Timothy Boone, Alex G. Kavanagh, Matthew Gretzer, Stuart Boyd, Jeffrey C. Loh-Doyle, Wayne J.G. Hellstrom

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the timing of radiation therapy on artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) impacts complication rates, revision rates, and number of pads per day after placement.

METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of men with prostate cancer who underwent AUS placement and radiation therapy between 1987 and 2016.

RESULTS: Of 306 men, 292 (95.4%) received radiation before AUS placement (group 1) and 14 (4.6%) received radiation after AUS placement (group 2). Median follow-up was 30 months after AUS placement. Group 1 had 32 of 292 (11.0%) patients suffer from erosion, compared with 0 of 14 (0.0%) patients in group 2 (P = .191). None of the patients in group 2 had infection or mechanical failure. The number of patients who received revision in group 1 was 91 of 292 (31.2%) and in group 2 was 2 of 14 (14.3%) (P = .180). The number of pads used per day in group 1 before and after AUS placement was 5.24 ± 3.12 and 1.13 ± 1.31, respectively (P <.001). In group 2, the number of pads used per day before and after AUS placement was 6.09 ± 1.97 and 1.53 ± 0.99, respectively (P <.001). There was no significant difference in the average number of postoperative pads used per day between group 1 and group 2 (P = .907).

CONCLUSION: The timing of radiation therapy does not appear to significantly affect complication rates or urinary continence, as measured in pads used after AUS placement. This multi-institutional retrospective analysis showed similar erosion and revision rates when radiation occurred after AUS placement and demonstrates preliminary safety and feasibility of the administration of radiation after AUS placement.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	160-165
Number of pages	6
Journal	Urology
Volume	113
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.041
State	Published - Mar 2018

Keywords

Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Cohort Studies
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Prostatectomy/adverse effects
Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy
Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Urinary Incontinence, Stress/etiology
Urinary Sphincter, Artificial
Urodynamics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Urology

Access to Document

10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.041

Cite this

DeLay, K. J., Haney, N. M., Chiang, J., Stewart, C., Yafi, F. A., Angermeier, K., Wood, H., Boone, T., Kavanagh, A. G., Gretzer, M., Boyd, S., Loh-Doyle, J. C., & Hellstrom, W. J. G. (2018). Comparison of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Before or After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement: A Multi-Institutional, Retrospective Analysis. Urology, 113, 160-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.041

DeLay, KJ, Haney, NM, Chiang, J, Stewart, C, Yafi, FA, Angermeier, K, Wood, H, Boone, T, Kavanagh, AG, Gretzer, M, Boyd, S, Loh-Doyle, JC & Hellstrom, WJG 2018, 'Comparison of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Before or After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement: A Multi-Institutional, Retrospective Analysis', Urology, vol. 113, pp. 160-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.041

@article{c97a82dffa424430b902f515d1377840,

title = "Comparison of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Before or After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement: A Multi-Institutional, Retrospective Analysis",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To determine if the timing of radiation therapy on artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) impacts complication rates, revision rates, and number of pads per day after placement.METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of men with prostate cancer who underwent AUS placement and radiation therapy between 1987 and 2016.RESULTS: Of 306 men, 292 (95.4%) received radiation before AUS placement (group 1) and 14 (4.6%) received radiation after AUS placement (group 2). Median follow-up was 30 months after AUS placement. Group 1 had 32 of 292 (11.0%) patients suffer from erosion, compared with 0 of 14 (0.0%) patients in group 2 (P = .191). None of the patients in group 2 had infection or mechanical failure. The number of patients who received revision in group 1 was 91 of 292 (31.2%) and in group 2 was 2 of 14 (14.3%) (P = .180). The number of pads used per day in group 1 before and after AUS placement was 5.24 ± 3.12 and 1.13 ± 1.31, respectively (P <.001). In group 2, the number of pads used per day before and after AUS placement was 6.09 ± 1.97 and 1.53 ± 0.99, respectively (P <.001). There was no significant difference in the average number of postoperative pads used per day between group 1 and group 2 (P = .907).CONCLUSION: The timing of radiation therapy does not appear to significantly affect complication rates or urinary continence, as measured in pads used after AUS placement. This multi-institutional retrospective analysis showed similar erosion and revision rates when radiation occurred after AUS placement and demonstrates preliminary safety and feasibility of the administration of radiation after AUS placement.",

keywords = "Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cohort Studies, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prostatectomy/adverse effects, Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy, Radiotherapy, Adjuvant, Retrospective Studies, Risk Assessment, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Urinary Incontinence, Stress/etiology, Urinary Sphincter, Artificial, Urodynamics",

author = "DeLay, {Kenneth J.} and Haney, {Nora M.} and Jason Chiang and Carrie Stewart and Yafi, {Faysal A.} and Kenneth Angermeier and Hadley Wood and Timothy Boone and Kavanagh, {Alex G.} and Matthew Gretzer and Stuart Boyd and Loh-Doyle, {Jeffrey C.} and Hellstrom, {Wayne J.G.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2017 Elsevier Inc.",

year = "2018",

month = mar,

doi = "10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.041",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "113",

pages = "160--165",

journal = "Urology",

issn = "0090-4295",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Before or After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement

T2 - A Multi-Institutional, Retrospective Analysis

AU - DeLay, Kenneth J.

AU - Haney, Nora M.

AU - Chiang, Jason

AU - Stewart, Carrie

AU - Yafi, Faysal A.

AU - Angermeier, Kenneth

AU - Wood, Hadley

AU - Boone, Timothy

AU - Kavanagh, Alex G.

AU - Gretzer, Matthew

AU - Boyd, Stuart

AU - Loh-Doyle, Jeffrey C.

AU - Hellstrom, Wayne J.G.

PY - 2018/3

Y1 - 2018/3

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To determine if the timing of radiation therapy on artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) impacts complication rates, revision rates, and number of pads per day after placement.METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of men with prostate cancer who underwent AUS placement and radiation therapy between 1987 and 2016.RESULTS: Of 306 men, 292 (95.4%) received radiation before AUS placement (group 1) and 14 (4.6%) received radiation after AUS placement (group 2). Median follow-up was 30 months after AUS placement. Group 1 had 32 of 292 (11.0%) patients suffer from erosion, compared with 0 of 14 (0.0%) patients in group 2 (P = .191). None of the patients in group 2 had infection or mechanical failure. The number of patients who received revision in group 1 was 91 of 292 (31.2%) and in group 2 was 2 of 14 (14.3%) (P = .180). The number of pads used per day in group 1 before and after AUS placement was 5.24 ± 3.12 and 1.13 ± 1.31, respectively (P <.001). In group 2, the number of pads used per day before and after AUS placement was 6.09 ± 1.97 and 1.53 ± 0.99, respectively (P <.001). There was no significant difference in the average number of postoperative pads used per day between group 1 and group 2 (P = .907).CONCLUSION: The timing of radiation therapy does not appear to significantly affect complication rates or urinary continence, as measured in pads used after AUS placement. This multi-institutional retrospective analysis showed similar erosion and revision rates when radiation occurred after AUS placement and demonstrates preliminary safety and feasibility of the administration of radiation after AUS placement.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To determine if the timing of radiation therapy on artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) impacts complication rates, revision rates, and number of pads per day after placement.METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of men with prostate cancer who underwent AUS placement and radiation therapy between 1987 and 2016.RESULTS: Of 306 men, 292 (95.4%) received radiation before AUS placement (group 1) and 14 (4.6%) received radiation after AUS placement (group 2). Median follow-up was 30 months after AUS placement. Group 1 had 32 of 292 (11.0%) patients suffer from erosion, compared with 0 of 14 (0.0%) patients in group 2 (P = .191). None of the patients in group 2 had infection or mechanical failure. The number of patients who received revision in group 1 was 91 of 292 (31.2%) and in group 2 was 2 of 14 (14.3%) (P = .180). The number of pads used per day in group 1 before and after AUS placement was 5.24 ± 3.12 and 1.13 ± 1.31, respectively (P <.001). In group 2, the number of pads used per day before and after AUS placement was 6.09 ± 1.97 and 1.53 ± 0.99, respectively (P <.001). There was no significant difference in the average number of postoperative pads used per day between group 1 and group 2 (P = .907).CONCLUSION: The timing of radiation therapy does not appear to significantly affect complication rates or urinary continence, as measured in pads used after AUS placement. This multi-institutional retrospective analysis showed similar erosion and revision rates when radiation occurred after AUS placement and demonstrates preliminary safety and feasibility of the administration of radiation after AUS placement.

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Cohort Studies

KW - Follow-Up Studies

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Prostatectomy/adverse effects

KW - Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy

KW - Radiotherapy, Adjuvant

KW - Retrospective Studies

KW - Risk Assessment

KW - Time Factors

KW - Treatment Outcome

KW - Urinary Incontinence, Stress/etiology

KW - Urinary Sphincter, Artificial

KW - Urodynamics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85040462277&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85040462277&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.041

DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2017.11.041

M3 - Article

C2 - 29223493

AN - SCOPUS:85040462277

SN - 0090-4295

VL - 113

SP - 160

EP - 165

JO - Urology

JF - Urology

ER -

Comparison of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Before or After Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement: A Multi-Institutional, Retrospective Analysis

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this