What are the alternatives if an Artificial Urinary Sphincter (AUS) fails?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: July 18, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Alternatives When Artificial Urinary Sphincter (AUS) Fails

For patients with failed AUS, the most effective salvage options include AUS revision/replacement, tandem cuff placement, urethral repositioning, or ultimately urinary diversion for refractory cases that significantly impact quality of life. 1

Evaluation of AUS Failure

When an AUS fails, a systematic approach to determine the cause is essential:

  1. History and physical examination to determine:

    • Device activation/cycling issues
    • Duration since implantation (recent vs. years of function)
    • Symptoms suggesting infection or erosion
  2. Diagnostic workup:

    • Cystoscopy to evaluate cuff coaptation
    • Cross-sectional imaging (ultrasound or CT) to assess for fluid leaks in the system
    • Evaluation for urethral atrophy

Salvage Options Based on Failure Mechanism

1. AUS Revision/Replacement

  • For mechanical failure: A malfunctioning AUS can be explanted and replaced in the same operative setting if the patient is healthy 1
  • For infection: Complete removal of all components is necessary, with a waiting period of 3-6 months before reimplantation at a different urethral location 1
  • For erosion: Explant the device and leave a urethral catheter in place for several weeks to allow healing 1

2. Surgical Modifications for Persistent Incontinence

  • Cuff repositioning: For distally located cuffs, proximal relocation may improve continence 1
  • Cuff downsizing: For larger cuffs, using a smaller size may improve coaptation 1
  • Tandem cuff placement: Effective as a salvage procedure for persistent incontinence 1
  • Pressure-regulating balloon adjustment: Increasing pressure may improve continence in selected cases

3. Male Sling as an Alternative

  • Male slings may be considered in select patients with mild to moderate incontinence 2, 3
  • However, evidence suggests lower success rates compared to AUS revision in patients who have already failed an AUS 1
  • Bone-anchored slings show cure rates between 58-86%, but with complication rates up to 14.5% 3

4. Adjustable Male Sling Systems

  • Adjustable slings (like the Argus system) have shown early success rates of 73% in selected patients 4
  • These allow for post-operative tension adjustment to optimize continence
  • However, they have higher complication rates (10-22%) than fixed slings 3

5. Urinary Diversion (Last Resort)

  • For refractory cases: Urinary diversion with or without cystectomy is an option for patients with multiple device failures, intractable bladder neck contracture, or severe detrusor instability 1
  • Options include:
    • Ileal conduit
    • Continent catheterizable pouch
  • This approach should be reserved for patients who cannot obtain long-term satisfactory quality of life with other options 1

Special Considerations

Radiation History

  • Patients with history of radiation therapy have higher failure rates with all surgical options
  • AUS remains the preferred option over slings in post-radiation patients 1

Bladder Neck Contracture

  • Patients with symptomatic vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis or bladder neck contracture should have this treated before addressing incontinence 1
  • These patients have decreased success rates with male slings, making AUS generally a better option 1

Comorbid Erectile Dysfunction

  • In patients with both incontinence and erectile dysfunction, concomitant surgery to address both conditions may be considered 1
  • However, patients should be counseled about potentially increased complication risks

Pitfalls and Caveats

  1. Infection risk: Always evaluate for and treat any urinary tract infection before revision surgery
  2. Timing: Wait 3-6 months after infection or erosion before reimplantation 1
  3. Patient expectations: Counsel patients that even revised AUS devices will likely lose effectiveness over time, with failure rates of approximately 24% at 5 years and 50% at 10 years 1
  4. Urethral atrophy: A common cause of recurrent incontinence that may require cuff downsizing or repositioning
  5. Device manipulation ability: Ensure patients have adequate dexterity to operate any new device 5

By following this systematic approach to AUS failure, most patients can achieve satisfactory continence outcomes with appropriate salvage procedures tailored to their specific failure mechanism and clinical situation.

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.