{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,24]],"date-time":"2025-04-24T04:33:06Z","timestamp":1745469186171,"version":"3.40.4"},"reference-count":14,"publisher":"S. Karger AG","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2016,1,1]],"date-time":"2016-01-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1451606400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Services\/SiteLicenses"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2016,1,1]],"date-time":"2016-01-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1451606400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Services\/SiteLicenses"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Urol Int"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2016]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Objectives:&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt; To assess morbidity, effectiveness and quality of life (QoL) of implant of Silimed periurethral constrictor (PC) in a consecutive series of patients who had stress urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Material and Methods:&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt; A prospective non-randomized study designed on patients who underwent implant of Silimed PC. Primary end point was postoperative morbidity and secondary end points were effectiveness of implant and QoL. We performed a sub-analysis of men who received previous radiation and we compared the subpopulation with radiation-na\u00efve patients. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Results:&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt; Nineteen patients (31.6%) received pelvic radiation therapy prior implant. All procedures were completed successfully with median operative time of 55 (IQR 50-62.5) min. We recorded 47 (78.3%) postoperative complications in 30 men. Twenty-three men (38.3%) developed urethral erosion at median follow-up of 27.5 (IQR 21-35) months, and 1 man (1.9%) had rectourethral fistula at 2 months. Risk of urethral erosion increased significantly among patients who received radiation (63.1 vs. 26.8%; p &lt; 0.001). In 12 cases (20%), we recorded malfunctioning of the reservoir requiring replacement. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Conclusion:&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt; The implant of Silimed device is not safe due to a high risk of urethral erosion. Careful patient selection and detailed counseling are mandatory when considering the implant of PC in adult patients.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1159\/000441801","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2016,5,20]],"date-time":"2016-05-20T08:05:40Z","timestamp":1463731540000},"page":"26-31","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":4,"title":["Long-Term Outcomes of the Implant of a Periurethral Constrictor for Stress Urinary Incontinence Following Radical Prostatectomy"],"prefix":"10.1159","volume":"97","author":[{"given":"Michele","family":"Favro","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Michele","family":"Billia","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Alessandro","family":"Volpe","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Monica","family":"Zacchero","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Carlo","family":"Terrone","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"127","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2016,5,20]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1159\/000369475"},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1159\/000368618"},{"key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11136-005-5266-5"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eururo.2012.11.034"},{"key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2006.10.062"},{"key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-5347(01)65766-5"},{"key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1590\/S1677-55382011000400007"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2009.12.078"},{"key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1159\/000347123"},{"key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2012.08.246"},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00192-013-2134-7"},{"key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/01.ju.0000108741.30368.42"},{"key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2012.02.022"},{"key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2011.11.065"}],"container-title":["Urologia Internationalis"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Article\/Pdf\/441801","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Article\/Pdf\/441801","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Article\/Pdf\/441801","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,23]],"date-time":"2025-04-23T18:04:27Z","timestamp":1745431467000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/karger.com\/article\/doi\/10.1159\/000441801"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2016]]},"references-count":14,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2016,7,11]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1159\/000441801","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0042-1138","1423-0399"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0042-1138"},{"type":"electronic","value":"1423-0399"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2016]]}}}