Sphincter Revision
Sphincter Revision - Related Videos
03:25
Transcorporal Artificial Urinary Sphincter Cuff Placement in a Case Requiring Revision for Urethral Atrophy
0 Views •
Cited by 2 •
2022
Here we describe the application of transcorporal artificial urethral sphincter (AUS) placement in a case requiring revision of an artificial urinary sphincter for urethral atrophy.
09:50
A Revised Method for Inducing Secondary Lymphedema in the Hindlimb of Mice
0 Views •
Cited by 7 •
2019
This animal model enables researchers to induce statistically significant secondary lymphedema in the hindlimb of mice, lasting at least 8 weeks. The model can be used to study the pathophysiology of lymphedema and to investigate novel treatment options.
07:52
Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen
0 Views •
Cited by 4 •
2020
We developed the original Dual Task Screen (DTS) as a portable, low-cost measure that can evaluate athletes with sports-induced mild traumatic brain injury. We revised the original DTS for future clinical use and developed a neuroimaging-compatible version of the DTS to measure neural underpinnings of single and dual task performance.
07:45
The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report
0 Views •
Cited by 7 •
2022
A complex revision hip arthroplasty was performed using a custom-made implant and mixed reality technology. According to the authors' knowledge, this is the first report of such procedure described in the literature.
06:05
A Revised Surgical Approach to Induce Endolymphatic Hydrops in the Guinea Pig
0 Views •
Cited by 6 •
2020
This article demonstrates an extradural approach to obliterate the guinea pig endolymphatic sac and injure the endolymphatic duct with a fine pick in order to induce experimental endolymphatic hydrops.
FAQs
Scarred tissue can interfere with identifying and repositioning the damaged muscle ends. Releasing it when necessary helps the surgeon expose tissue that can be brought back into alignment. This step is not necessarily required in every case, because the need for scar release depends on the condition of the surgical field and the extent of prior damage.
Reapproximating separated or weakened muscle ends recreates a continuous muscular ring around the bodily opening. That continuity provides the structural basis for improved control, rather than leaving a gap or discontinuity in the injured sphincter. The expected functional benefit still depends on tissue quality, healing, and how much of the original muscle remains usable.
Outcome is influenced by the cause and extent of muscle damage, the quality of the available tissue, and the healing process after surgery. Careful patient selection and appropriate surgical technique also matter. These factors explain why restoration of muscle continuity does not produce identical functional results for every patient undergoing revision.
The surgeon first identifies the disrupted or weakened muscle and determines whether scarred tissue must be released. The muscle ends are then reapproximated to reconstruct a continuous ring. This work requires technique suited to the individual injury, because the amount of disruption and the condition of the tissue can vary between patients.
Clinicians may consider the procedure when fecal incontinence is associated with anal sphincter damage from childbirth-related injury, trauma, or previous surgery. It should follow appropriate clinical evaluation rather than being selected solely on the symptom. Evaluation helps determine whether the observed dysfunction corresponds to a repairable or reconstructable muscle problem.
The procedure is most appropriately considered after clinicians assess the cause and extent of sphincter damage and the quality of the available tissue. These findings help determine whether revision is suitable and what surgical approach may be required. Careful selection also sets realistic expectations because healing and functional recovery can differ substantially.
Postoperative assessment determines whether healing has occurred and whether sphincter control has improved. It is important because reconstruction alone does not guarantee the same degree of functional recovery in every case. Reviewing the result in relation to the original injury, tissue quality, and healing helps clinicians evaluate the procedure's outcome in medicine.