Artificial urinary sphincters around intestinal segments: are they safe?

P M Weston, John Morgan, Julia Hussein, T P Stephenson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


Artificial urinary sphincters (AUS) were implanted around intestinal segments to achieve urinary continence in 8 patients and faecal continence in 1. In 6 patients the cuff was placed around the lower end of the cystoplasty following bladder neck (5) or urethral (1) erosion. Four are completely dry, 1 on self-intermittent catheterisation (SIC). One has mild stress incontinence. In 1 patient the cuff eroded at 8 months. Two patients had cuffs implanted parastomally to create continent diversion. One is satisfactory on SIC and the other had her AUS explanted because of life-threatening metabolic acidosis. The rectal cuff was explanted because of faecal impaction above the cuff. As an absolute last resort, placing an AUS round a cystoplasty appears little more hazardous than round bladder neck. The use of the AUS for continent diversion has not been pursued because of reliable techniques of non-prosthetic continent diversion. The current model of the AUS is unsuitable for the treatment of faecal incontinence.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)150-154
Number of pages5
JournalBritish Journal of Urology
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 1991


  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Cecum
  • Fecal Incontinence
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Ileum
  • Postoperative Complications
  • Prostheses and Implants
  • Urinary Bladder
  • Urinary Diversion
  • Urinary Incontinence


Dive into the research topics of 'Artificial urinary sphincters around intestinal segments: are they safe?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this