Literature DB >> 25307701

Update on 2-year outcomes of the TOMS™ transobturator male sling for the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence.

Rene Yiou1, Zentia Bütow1, Juliette Parisot1, Odile Lingombet1, Déborah Augustin1, Alexandre de la Taille1, Laurent Salomon1, Etienne Audureau1.   

Abstract

AIMS: To update the 2-year outcomes of the TOMS™ transobturator male sling for treating post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (pRP-UI) in a group of patients previously evaluated at 1 year.
METHODS: We prospectively followed 40 patients with pRP-UI before and 6, 12, and 24 months after implantation of the TOMS™ transobturator male sling. Urinary symptoms were evaluated using the following questionnaires: USP, ICIQ, UCLA-PCI (urinary bother domain), PGI-I, and daily pad use. Success was defined as patients wearing no or only one security pad. We also report on any other surgical procedures for treating persistent incontinence during the follow-up period.
RESULTS: Of 40 patients included in the 1-year follow-up, seven required additional surgical treatment. In the remaining patients (n = 33), significant improvement (P < 0.001) compared to baseline was seen, and a subsequent tendency (non-significant) toward impairment was noted throughout the three postoperative follow-ups for the ICIQ (14.4 ± 4.4 [baseline], 7.6 ± 5.7 [6 months], 8.1 ± 5.6 [12 months], 8.9 ± 5.5 [24 months]), USP-stress urinary (6.7 ± 2.2, 2.8 ± 2.4, 2.8 ± 2.4, 3.2 ± 2.8), ULCA-PCI-urinary bother (10.0 ± 12.5, 66.0 ± 33.0, 64.0 ± 31.5, 62.0 ± 30.7) scores, and pad use (2.5 ± 1.2, 0.7 ± 1.1, 0.8 ± 1.2, 0.9 ± 1.2). Significant impairment in postoperative PGI-I (6.2 ± 0.9, 6.1 ± 0.9, 5.8 ± 1.1, P = 0.028) and USP-overactive bladder symptoms scores (5.4 ± 3.6 [6 months] vs. 6.6 ± 3.7 [24 months], P = 0.046) were noted. A total of 18 (54.5%), 17 (51.5%), and 15 (45.5%) patients wore no postoperative pad, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Approximately half of the patients continue to wear no pad 2 years after TOMS™ transobturator male sling implantation. However, a tendency toward impaired continence, possibly associated with overactive bladder symptoms, was noted.
© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  male sling; overactive bladder; radical prostatectomy; urinary incontinence

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25307701     DOI: 10.1002/nau.22668

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn        ISSN: 0733-2467            Impact factor:   2.696


  5 in total

Review 1.  Review of surgical implant procedures for male incontinence after radical prostatectomy according to IDEAL framework.

Authors:  Dimitri Barski; Holger Gerullis; Thomas Otto
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2017-05-06

Review 2.  Comparison of Different Invasive Devices for the Treatment of Urinary Incontinence after Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Stefano Salciccia; Pietro Viscuso; Giulio Bevilacqua; Antonio Tufano; Paolo Casale; Ettore De Berardinis; Giovanni Battista Di Pierro; Susanna Cattarino; Alessandro Gentilucci; Francesca Lourdes Lia; Di Giulio Ivan; Davide Rosati; Francesco Del Giudice; Alessandro Sciarra; Gianna Mariotti
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2022-06-21

Review 3.  Management of Overactive Bladder Symptoms After Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Benoit Peyronnet; Benjamin M Brucker
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Sling Surgery for Male Urinary Incontinence Including Post Prostatectomy Incontinence: A Challenge to the Urologist.

Authors:  Kwang Jin Ko; Sung Jin Kim; Sung Tae Cho
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 2.835

5.  Artificial Urinary Sphincter for Postradical Prostatectomy Urinary Incontinence - Is It the Best Option?

Authors:  Yun-Sok Ha; Eun Sang Yoo
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2019-12-31       Impact factor: 2.835

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.