Skip to main content
. 2011 Jan 13;5(4):268–272. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.09137

Table 2.

Revisions following initial artificial urinary sphincter placement

Our series (n=34) In the literature4
Overall 6 (17.6%) 8–45%
Infection and erosion 3 (8.8%) <8%
Infection 1 (2.9%)
Erosion 1 (2.9%)
Infection + erosion 1 (2.9%)
Device failure 1 (2.9%) 0–53%
Second cuff placement 2 (5.9%) 3–9%