{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02153316106804479, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009474590869939707, 'mean_word_length': 5.213903743315508, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
One hundred artificial sphincters.

One hundred patients with urinary incontinence of various aetiologies underwent implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). In 40 patients various reconstructive procedures of the lower urinary tract were carried out at the same time. In 93 patients the results were successful and they are continent. Six are incontinent and 4 of these await AUS replacement. One patient has had a urinary diversion with the sphincter still in situ and functioning. The complication rate was 45% (of which 29% were designated "sphincter-related"). Half of these were accounted for by two complications: one was a change in bladder behaviour in patients with neuropathic bladders and the other was stress incontinence as a direct result of implanting low pressure devices. If these two factors and the "sphincter-unrelated" problems are discounted, the complication rate was 13%. The AUS is a satisfactory and successful method of treatment for sphincter weakness incontinence regardless of aetiology and the results suggest no contraindication to implantation at the same time as reconstructive surgery of the lower urinary tract.