Table 3. Comparison of adjustable sling options for male stress urinary incontinence.
| Treatment | Study | Measure of success | Infection rate | Complications | Country (year) of approval |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATOMS Adjustable Sling (32,33) | Esquinas et al. 2019 | Mean 67% and 90% improvement between 20 studies | 5.75% needed device removal | Europe | |
| 16% complications, 3% major complications | |||||
| Transient postoperative dysesthesia | |||||
| Angulo et al. 2018 | 3/215 patients with mean 24 months follow-up | ||||
| Argus Adjustable Sling (61,62) | Hübner et al. 2011 | 79.2% (80/101) dry with 0–1 PPD in moderate to severe SUI | 15.8% (16/101) needed removal | ||
| 38.6% (39/101) required adjustment | |||||
| Romano et al. 2009 | 66% (31/48) dry and 12.8% (6/48) 1 PPD | 6.3% (3/48) infection | Erosions through urethra, bladder, and abdominal wall | ||
| Perineal pain | |||||
| Acute urinary retention, spontaneously resolving | |||||
| Remeex Adjustable Sling (63) | Sousa-Escandón et al. 2007 | 64.7% (33/51) cured (no or safety pad) | 3.9% (2/51) removed due to infection | Intraoperative bladder perforation | Many European countries |
| Perineal hematoma | FDA approved Nov 02, 2006 | ||||
| Transient perineal discomfort and pain |
PPD, pads per day; FDA, United States Food and Drug Administration.