Project description:BackgroundThis meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy of the male sling and artificial urinary sphincter on treating post-prostatectomy incontinence by evaluating daily pad use, cure rate, frequency of improvement in incontinence, and quality of life.MethodsMedline, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (until March 31, 2014) for studies that investigated the effectiveness of artificial urinary sphincter or sling surgical treatments for prostate cancer. The primary outcome was daily pad use before and after surgery and secondary outcomes were quality of life before and after surgery, and frequency of cures (no need to use of a pad for at least 1 day) and improvements (decreased pad usage) in incontinence after surgery.ResultsWe found that that both the sling and artificial urinary sphincter significantly decreased the number of pads used per day by about 3 (P-values <0.001) and increased the quality of life compared with before intervention (P-values < 0.001). In addition, the cure rate and was around 60%. Intervention resulted in improvement in incontinence by about 25% (P < 0.001).ConclusionOur findings indicate that both sling and artificial urinary sphincter interventions are effective in reducing incontinence and improving the patient's quality of life.
Project description:PurposeOne of the most frequent side effects of radical prostatectomy (RP) is urinary incontinence. The primary cause of urine incontinence is usually thought to be impaired urethral sphincter function; nevertheless, the pathophysiology and recovery process of urine incontinence remains unclear. This study aimed to identify potential risk variables, build a risk prediction tool that considers preoperative urodynamic findings, and direct doctors to take necessary action to reduce the likelihood of developing early urinary incontinence.MethodsWe retrospectively screened patients who underwent radical prostatectomy between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2023 at the First People 's Hospital of Nantong, China. According to nomogram results, patients who developed incontinence within three months were classified as having early incontinence. The training group's general characteristics were first screened using univariate logistic analysis, and the LASSO method was applied for the best prediction. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was carried out to determine independent risk factors for early postoperative urine incontinence in the training group and to create nomograms that predict the likelihood of developing early urinary incontinence. The model was internally validated by computing the performance of the validation cohort. The nomogram discrimination, correction, and clinical usefulness were assessed using the c-index, receiver operating characteristic curve, correction plot, and clinical decision curve.ResultsThe study involved 142 patients in all. Multivariate logistic regression analysis following RP found seven independent risk variables for early urinary incontinence. A nomogram was constructed based on these independent risk factors. The training and validation groups' c-indices showed that the model had high accuracy and stability. The calibration curve demonstrates that the corrective effect of the training and verification groups is perfect, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve indicates great identification capacity. Using a nomogram, the clinical net benefit was maximised within a probability threshold of 0.01-1, according to decision curve analysis (DCA).ConclusionThe nomogram model created in this study can offer a clear, personalised analysis of the risk of early urine incontinence following RP. It is highly discriminatory and accurate, and it can help create efficient preventative measures and identify high-risk populations.
Project description:Background Artificial Urinary Sphincter (AUS) has always been considered the gold standard for surgical treatment of male non-neurogenic Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate AUS’s effectiveness in treating male SUI, as described in the literature. Methods Two independent reviewers used PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP databases, to find the efficacy of artificial urethral sphincter in treating SUI after male prostate surgery. We excluded studies on female urinary incontinence. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy based on the degree of dry rate after AUS AMS 800™: postoperative complete dry was defined as no pad use per day. Postoperative social dry was defined as 0–1 pad per day. The secondary goal was to analyze the use of AUS AMS 800™ to improve SUI and to calculate the degree of influence by analyzing the number of pads and postoperative quality of life. And methodologic quality of the overall body of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) guidelines. Results The data in this paper are mostly based on prospective or retrospective cohort studies without control groups. Fortunately, most studies have the same criteria to assess effectiveness. The pooled data of 1271 patients from 19 studies (6 prospective cohort studies, 12 retrospective cohort studies, and 1 randomized controlled trial) showed that: the number of pads used (pads/ day) after AUS was significantly reduced by about 4 (P < 0.001) and the quality of life was improved (P < 0.001).In addition, data analysis showed a high degree of heterogeneity between studies. According to the severity of baseline SUI, subgroup analysis was performed on the postoperative dry rate and social dry rate. Although heterogeneity was reduced, I2 is still above 50%, considering that heterogeneity may not be related to the severity of SUI. The random effect model was used for data analysis: the dry rate was about 52% (P < 0.001), and the social dry rate was about 82% (P < 0.001). The evidence level of GRADE of dry rate is very low, the evidence level of social dry rate and Pads use (pads/day) is Moderate, and the evidence level of Quality of life is low. Conclusion Although the evidence in this paper is based on descriptive studies and limited follow-up, the results show that AUS is effective in treating urinary incontinence and can improve patients’ quality of life.
Project description:Pelvic floor muscle exercise (PFME) is the most common conservative management for urinary incontinence (UI) after radical prostatectomy (RP). However, whether the PFME guided by a therapist (G-PFME) can contribute to the recovery of urinary continence for patients after RP is still controversial. We performed this meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness of G-PFME on UI after RP and to explore whether the additional preoperative G-PFME is superior to postoperative G-PFME alone. Literature search was conducted on Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed, to obtain all relevant randomized controlled trials published before March 1, 2018. Outcome data were pooled and analyzed with Review Manager 5.3 to compare the continence rates of G-PFME with control and to compare additional preoperative G-PFME with postoperative G-PFME. Twenty-two articles with 2647 patients were included. The continence rates of G-PFME were all superior to control at different follow-up time points, with the odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 2.79 (1.53-5.07), 2.80 (1.87-4.19), 2.93 (1.19-7.22), 4.11 (2.24-7.55), and 2.41 (1.33-4.36) at 1 month, 3 months, 4 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery, respectively. However, there was no difference between additional preoperative G-PFME and postoperative G-PFME, with the OR (95% CI) of 1.70 (0.56-5.11) and 1.35 (0.41-4.40) at 1 month and 3 months after RP, respectively. G-PFME could improve the recovery of urinary continence at both early and long-term stages. Starting the PFME preoperatively might not produce extra benefits for patients at early stage, compared with postoperative PFME.
Project description:BackgroundThe underutilization of additional supportive muscles is one of the potential reasons for suboptimal efficacy of conventional pelvic floor muscle training (CPFMT). The present study concentrates on any advantage of advanced pelvic floor muscle training (APFMT) in patients with urinary incontinence (UI) after radical prostatectomy (RP).MethodsLiterature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science from database inception to February 2020. The data analysis was performed by the Cochrane Collaboration's software RevMan 5.3.ResultsBoth APFMT and CPFMT groups indicates superiority over baseline in terms of pad number, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) score, pad weight at short-term follow-up, and PFME and PFMS at intermediate-term follow-up. No adverse events were reported in all included studies. Patients receiving APFMT had a similar attrition rate to those receiving CPFMT (18/236 vs. 22/282, P=0.61). Compared to CPFMT group, APFMT group provided intermediate-term advantages in terms of pad number (MD: -0.75, 95% CI: -1.36 to -0.14; P=0.02), ICIQ-SF score (MD: -3.79, 95% CI: -5.89 to -1.69; P=0.0004), PFME (MD: 1.93, 95% CI: 0.99 to 2.87; P<0.0001) and pad weight (MD: -1.40, 95% CI: -1.70 to -1.00; P<0.00001).ConclusionsCurrent evidence indicated that APFMT might facilitate the recovery of UI after RP according to intermediate-term advantages over CPFMT in terms of pad number, ICIQ-SF score, PFME and pad weight. Further standardized, physiotherapist-guided and well-designed clinical trials conducted by large multicenter and experienced multidisciplinary clinicians are still warranted.
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the effectiveness of various conservative treatment strategies for women with stress urinary incontinence.MethodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted from their inception through March 2024, without restrictions on language or location. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of conservative treatments for stress urinary incontinence, using short-term pad test or the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF) score as outcome measures, were included. We conducted a network meta-analysis using a random-effects model to compare the effectiveness of different conservative treatment strategies, employing prediction interval plots and league tables, and ranked them according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The quality of the included studies was assessed following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.ResultsA total of 31 RCTs involving 1,900 patients across 8 intervention categories were included in the analysis. SUCRA rankings indicated that electrical stimulation (SUCRA = 95.9%) was the most effective therapy for improving ICIQ-UI SF scores, followed by biofeedback electrical stimulation (SUCRA = 84.9%), radiofrequency (SUCRA = 77.5%), biofeedback (SUCRA = 57.8%), magnetic stimulation (SUCRA = 45.3%), pelvic floor muscle training (SUCRA = 38.4%), Er: YAG laser (SUCRA = 37.4%), and CO2 laser (SUCRA = 7.4%). In terms of reducing urine leakage, the treatments were ranked in descending order as follows: Er: YAG laser (SUCRA = 97.5%), biofeedback electrical stimulation (SUCRA = 83.4%), biofeedback (SUCRA = 67.0%), radiofrequency (SUCRA = 59.5%), electrical stimulation (SUCRA = 48.4%), pelvic floor muscle training (SUCRA = 43.0%), magnetic stimulation (SUCRA = 27.8%), and CO2 laser (SUCRA = 21.4%). Based on the clustered rankings of the two metrics, biofeedback electrical stimulation was identified as the most effective therapy for improving stress urinary incontinence.ConclusionBased on the combined analysis of two indicators, we found that biofeedback electrical stimulation may be the optimal therapy for the conservative management of stress urinary incontinence.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024569845.
Project description:PurposeTo systematically update evidence on the clinical efficacy and safety of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) in patients with prostate cancer.Materials and methodsElectronic databases, including ovidMEDLINE, ovidEMBASE, the Cochrane Library, KoreaMed, KMbase, and others, were searched, collecting data from January 1980 to August 2013. The quality of selected systematic reviews was assessed using the revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews and the modified Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for non-randomized studies.ResultsA total of 61 studies were included, including 38 from two previous systematic reviews rated as best available evidence and 23 additional studies that were more recent. There were no randomized controlled trials. Regarding safety, the risk of complications was lower for RARP than for RRP. Among functional outcomes, the risk of urinary incontinence was lower and potency rate was significantly higher for RARP than for RRP. Regarding oncologic outcomes, positive margin rates were comparable between groups, and although biochemical recurrence (BCR) rates were lower for RARP than for RRP, recurrence-free survival was similar after long-term follow up.ConclusionRARP might be favorable to RRP in regards to post-operative complications, peri-operative outcomes, and functional outcomes. Positive margin and BCR rates were comparable between the two procedures. As most of studies were of low quality, the results presented should be interpreted with caution, and further high quality studies controlling for selection, confounding, and selective reporting biases with longer-term follow-up are needed to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of RARP.
Project description:Bladder dysfunction is a relatively common urodynamic finding post radical prostatectomy (RP). It can be the sole cause of post prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) or may be found in association with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive review of the diagnosis and different treatments of post RP bladder dysfunction. A comprehensive literature review using medical search engines was performed. The search included a combination of the following terms, PPI, detrusor overactivity (DO), detrusor underactivity (DU), impaired compliance, anticholinergic, onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox®) and sacral neuromodulation (SNM). Definitions, general overview and management options were extracted from the relevant medical literature. DO, DU and impaired compliance are common and may occur alone or in combination with SUI. In some patients the conditions exist pre RP, in others they arise due to denervation and surgical changes. DO can be treated with anticholinergics, Botox® and SNM. DO may need to be treated before SUI surgery. DU may be a contraindication to male sling surgery as some patients may go into urinary retention. Severely impaired bladder compliance may be a contraindication to SUI surgery as the upper tracts may be at risk. Each individual dysfunction may affect the outcome of PPI treatments and clinicians should be alert to managing bladder dysfunction in PPI patients.
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the use of post radical prostatectomy (RP) urinary incontinence (PPI) surgery and to investigate factors related to its use.MethodsCohort study in Prostate Cancer database Sweden (PCBaSe) of men who underwent primary RP between 1998 and 2012. PPI correction procedures were identified in the Patient Registry. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of PPI surgeries were estimated.ResultsSeven hundred eighty-two out of 26 280 (3%) men underwent PPI surgery at a median time of 3 years after RP. There was an eightfold increase in the absolute number of PPI surgeries during 2000-2014 and a threefold increase in the number per 1000 RPs performed. Factors associated with high use PPI surgery were age >70, HR 1.96 (1.54-2.50), and high hospital RP volume (>100 RPs/year), HR 0.81 (0.66-0.99). There was a 10-fold difference in use of PPI surgery per 1000 RPs between the county with the highest versus lowest use. In a subgroup of men with Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROM); severe PPI was reported by 7% of men and 24% of them underwent PPI surgery.ConclusionsThree percent of all men received PPI surgery, with a 10-fold variation among health care providers. Only a quarter of men with severe PPI underwent PPI surgery, suggesting that PPI surgery remains underutilized.
Project description:BackgroundOn the basis of previous analyses of the incidence of urinary incontinence (UI) after radical prostatectomy (RP), the hospital RP volume threshold in the Netherlands was gradually increased from 20 per year in 2017, to 50 in 2018 and 100 from 2019 onwards.ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of hospital RP volumes on the incidence and risk of UI after RP (RP-UI).Design setting and participantsPatients who underwent RP during 2016-2020 were identified in the claims database of the largest health insurance company in the Netherlands. Incontinence was defined as an insurance claim for ≥1 pads/d.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe relationship between hospital RP volume (HV) and RP-UI was assessed via multivariable analysis adjusted for age, comorbidity, postoperative radiotherapy, and lymph node dissection.Results and limitationsRP-UI incidence nationwide and by RP volume category did not decrease significantly during the study period, and 5-yr RP-UI rates varied greatly among hospitals (19-85%). However, low-volume hospitals (≤120 RPs/yr) had a higher percentage of patients with RP-UI and higher variation in comparison to high-volume hospitals (>120 RPs/yr). In comparison to hospitals with low RP volumes throughout the study period, the risk of RP-UI was 29% lower in hospitals shifting from the low-volume to the high-volume category (>120 RPs/yr) and 52% lower in hospitals with a high RP volume throughout the study period (>120 RPs/yr for 5 yr).ConclusionsA focus on increasing hospital RP volumes alone does not seem to be sufficient to reduce the incidence of RP-UI, at least in the short term. Measurement of outcomes, preferably per surgeon, and the introduction of quality assurance programs are recommended.Patient summaryIn the Netherlands, centralization of surgery to remove the prostate (RP) because of cancer has not yet improved the occurrence of urinary incontinence (UI) after surgery. Hospitals performing more than 120 RP operations per year had better UI outcomes. However, there was a big difference in UI outcomes between hospitals.