Alexander Kretschmer1, Wilhelm Hübner2, Jaspreet S Sandhu3, Ricarda M Bauer4. 1. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik, Campus Großhadern, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: Alexander.kretschmer@med.uni-muenchen.de. 2. Landesklinikum Weinviertel Korneuburg, Klinik für Urologie, Kornneuburg, Austria. 3. Department of Surgery/Urology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 4. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik, Campus Großhadern, Munich, Germany.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Radical prostatectomy is the most common reason for male stress urinary incontinence. There is still uncertainty about its diagnostic and therapeutic management. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate current evidence regarding the diagnosis and therapy of postprostatectomy incontinence (PPI). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of the literature was performed in October 2015 using the Medline database. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Diagnosis and conservative treatment of PPI are currently mostly based on expert opinions. Pelvic floor muscle training is the noninvasive treatment of choice of PPI. For invasive management of moderate to severe PPI, the artificial urinary sphincter is still the treatment of choice, but an increasing number of adjustable and nonadjustable, noncompressive as well as compressive devices are used more frequently. However, no randomized controlled trial has yet investigated the outcome of one specific surgical treatment or compared the outcome of different surgical treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: The level of evidence addressing the surgical management of PPI is still unsatisfactory. Further research is urgently needed. PATIENT SUMMARY: Incontinence after the removal of the prostate (postprostatectomy incontinence) is the most common cause of male stress urinary incontinence. First-line therapy is physiotherapy and lifestyle changes. If no satisfactory improvement is obtained, various surgical treatment options are available. The most commonly used is the artificial urinary sphincter, but other treatment options like male slings are also available.
CONTEXT: Radical prostatectomy is the most common reason for male stress urinary incontinence. There is still uncertainty about its diagnostic and therapeutic management. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate current evidence regarding the diagnosis and therapy of postprostatectomy incontinence (PPI). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of the literature was performed in October 2015 using the Medline database. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Diagnosis and conservative treatment of PPI are currently mostly based on expert opinions. Pelvic floor muscle training is the noninvasive treatment of choice of PPI. For invasive management of moderate to severe PPI, the artificial urinary sphincter is still the treatment of choice, but an increasing number of adjustable and nonadjustable, noncompressive as well as compressive devices are used more frequently. However, no randomized controlled trial has yet investigated the outcome of one specific surgical treatment or compared the outcome of different surgical treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: The level of evidence addressing the surgical management of PPI is still unsatisfactory. Further research is urgently needed. PATIENT SUMMARY: Incontinence after the removal of the prostate (postprostatectomy incontinence) is the most common cause of male stress urinary incontinence. First-line therapy is physiotherapy and lifestyle changes. If no satisfactory improvement is obtained, various surgical treatment options are available. The most commonly used is the artificial urinary sphincter, but other treatment options like male slings are also available.
Authors: M Grabbert; T Hüsch; A Kretschmer; R Kirschner-Hermanns; R Anding; A Rose; A Friedl; A Obaje; A Heidenreich; B Brehmer; C M Naumann; F Queissert; H Loertzer; J Pfitzenmaier; J Nyarangi-Dix; M Kurosch; R Olianas; R Homberg; R Abdunnur; J Schweiger; T Hofmann; C Wotzka; T Pottek; W Huebner; A Haferkamp; R M Bauer Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Antonio Tienza; Petra L Graham; Jose E Robles; Fernando Diez-Caballero; David Rosell; Juan I Pascual; Manish I Patel; Sean F Mungovan Journal: Int Neurourol J Date: 2020-06-30 Impact factor: 2.835
Authors: Alexander Kretschmer; Tanja Hüsch; Ralf Anding; Tobias Pottek; Achim Rose; Werner Struss; Fabian Queissert; Carsten M Naumann; Joanne N Nyarangi-Dix; Bernhard Brehmer; Axel Haferkamp; Ricarda M Bauer Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2020 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.541