| Literature DB >> 31921886 |
Sandra Schönburg1, Wilhelm Bauer2, Nasreldin Mohammed1, Clemens Brössner2, Paolo Fornara1.
Abstract
Background: The urinary incontinence system ATOMS (A.M.I., Austria) generates suburethral compression through its sphincter cushion. To what extent the ATOMS may lead to overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms or which risk factors for these symptoms exist remain unknown to date. We report on our multicentre evaluation on the prevalence, status, and therapy of OAB after ATOMS.Entities:
Keywords: ATOMS; de novo; male stress urinary incontinence; management; overactive bladder
Year: 2019 PMID: 31921886 PMCID: PMC6928117 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2019.00072
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Surg ISSN: 2296-875X
Baseline characteristics of the patient population (n = 361 patients); percentage.
| • Radical prostatectomy (%) | 298/361 (82.5) | 286/343 (83.4) | 12/18 (67.7) |
| • Primary HIFU (%) | 3/361 (0.8) | 3/343 (0.9) | 0 |
| • TUR-P (%) | 59/361 (16.3) | 53/343 (15.5) | 6/18 (33.3) |
| • Open adenomectomy (%) | 1/361 (0.3) | 1/343 (0.3) | 0 |
| • Urethral injury (%) | 1/361 (0.3) | 1/343 (0.3) | 0 |
| • SUI I°: 1–2 pads/day (%) | 32/361 (8.9) | 31/343 (9) | 1/18 (5.6) |
| • SUI II°: 3–5 pads/day (%) | 214/361 (59.3) | 203/343 (59.2) | 11/18 (61.1) |
| • SUI III°: >5 pads/day (%) | 115/361 (31.9) | 109/343 (31.8) | 6/18 (33.3) |
Preoperative parameters of the patient population (n = 361 patients); mean ± standard deviation (range) or percentage.
| Patient age [years] (range) | 69 ± 7.0 (46–94) | 69 ± 7 (46–94) | 71 ± 6.3 (56–83) | 0.146 |
| BMI [kg/m2] (range) | 28 ± 3.7 (20–47) | 27.9 ± 3.6 (20–47) | 28.8 ± 4.7 (23–40) | 0.137 |
| ASA score (range) | 2.2 ± 0.6 (1–4) | 2.1 ± 0.6 (1–4) | 2.3 ± 0.6 (1–4) | 0.145 |
| CCI score (range) | 7.2 ± 1.4 (0–12) | 7.2 ± 1.3 (1–12) | 7.3 ± 1.4 (1–12) | 0.178 |
| Primary/secondary radiation (%) | 93/361 (25.8) | 86/343 (25.1) | 7/18 (38.9) | |
| Previous surgery due to SUI (%) | 94/361 (26) | 83/343 (24.2) | 11/18 (61.1) | |
| Previous transurethral resection for urethral stricture (%) | 85/361 (23.5) | 75/343 (21.9) | 10/18 (55.6) | |
| Preoperative 24-h pad count (range) | 5.1 ± 2.9 (2–18) | 5.1 ± 3.0 (2–18) | 4.7 ± 1.9 (2–9) | 0.772 |
| Preoperative 24-h pad test [ml] (range) | 589 ± 445 (40–2,500) | 590 ± 444 (40–2,500) | 580 ± 456 (110–2,500) | 0.827 |
| Preoperative ICIQ-SF score (range) | 16.8 ± 2.0 (12–21) | 16.8 ± 2.0 (12–21) | 16.9 ± 2.1 (12–21) | 0.655 |
Mann–Whitney U–test and Chi-square test (α = 0.05).
Significances highlighted in bold.
Peri- and postoperative parameters of the patient population (n = 361 patients); mean ± standard deviation (range).
| Operative time [min] (range) | 51 ± 21 (11–148) | 51 ± 21 (11–148) | 48 ± 21 (21–138) | 0.364 |
| Postoperative adjustments (range) | 3.4 ± 2.1 (0–9) | 3.5 ± 2.1 (0–9) | 2.5 ± 1.8 (0–7) | |
| Postoperative cushion volume [ml] (range) | 14.4 ± 6.4 (5–25) | 14.5 ± 6.5 (5–25) | 13.4 ± 5.6 (6–25) | 0.263 |
| Postoperative 24-h pad count (range) | 1.3 ± 1.3 (0–8) | 1.2 ± 1.4 (0–8) | 1.4 ± 1.3 (0–5) | 0.446 |
| Postoperative 24-h pad test [ml] (range) | 70 ± 147 (0–1,500) | 68 ± 142 (0–1,500) | 91 ± 192 (0–550) | 0.278 |
| Postoperative uroflowmetry [ml/s] (range) | 14.7 ± 3.9 (4–35) | 14.6 ± 3.8 (4–35) | 15.5 ± 4.3 (10–30) | 0.490 |
| Postoperative residual volume [ml] (range) | 8 ± 23 (0–200) | 8 ± 24 (0–200) | 6 ± 10 (0–40) | 0.969 |
| Postoperative ICIQ-SF score (range) | 4.9 ± 4.5 (0–20) | 5 ± 4.5 (0–20) | 3.6 ± 4 (0–16) |
Mann–Whitney U-test (α = 0.05).
Tendencies highlighted in bold.
Postoperative degree of stress urinary incontinence of the patient population (n = 361 patients); percentage.
| • Dry: 0-“safety pad”/day | 195/361 (54) | 186/343 (54.2) | 9/18 (50) |
| • Improvement: 1–2 pads/day (>50% improvement compared to baseline) | 101/361 (28) | 96/343 (28) | 5/18 (27.8) |
| • Failure: >2 pads/day (<50% improvement compared to baseline) | 65/361 (18) | 61/343 (17.8) | 4/18 (22.2) |
Figure 1Urodynamic evaluation of a patient with a newly diagnosed, derailed and primarily insulin-dependent type II diabetes mellitus and OAB voiding dysfunction; urodynamic evaluation showed a low-compliance urinary bladder.