Aims: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the AUS and an adjustable male sling (ATOMSTM). Methods: It was a retrospective observational cohort study with two arms. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed in order to limit selection bias and, consequently, a comparison between groups in terms of functional outcomes (24 h pad test and perception of improvement questionnaires), complications (overall complications, high-grade complications, reinterventions and explantations) and device survival was performed. Results: 49 patients in both arms were included. The baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. The mean follow up was 43 ± 35 months. Dryness was achieved in 22 patients (44.9%) in the AUS group and 11 (22.5%) in the sling group (p = 0.03). A total of 40 patients declared themselves well improved in the sling group (81%), while 35 (71%) declared the same in the AUS group (p = 0.78). The AUS was associated with more high-grade complications, reinterventions and explantations than the ATOMSTM. Survival at 60 months was 82 ± 9% in the sling group and 67 ± 7% in the AUS group (p = 0.03). Conclusions: While the AUS may be characterized by a higher dry rate, it has an increased risk of high-grade complications and reinterventions. It is proposed that the ATOMS prosthesis can be successfully used for patients who require a less invasive procedure that maintains good functional outcomes.