Syed Alam1, Richard Kershen1, Ilene Staff2, Tara McLaughlin3, Joseph Tortora2, Joseph Wagner1. 1. Urology Division, Hartford Healthcare Medical Group, Hartford Hospital, 85 Seymour Street, Suite 416, Hartford, CT, 06106, USA. 2. Hartford Hospital Research Program, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, 06106, USA. 3. Urology Division, Hartford Healthcare Medical Group, Hartford Hospital, 85 Seymour Street, Suite 416, Hartford, CT, 06106, USA. tara.mclaughlin@hhchealth.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine outcomes of surgical procedures for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy (post-RP UI) and to identify patients who may benefit from a surgical intervention to treat post-RP UI. METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) from July 2004 through July 2016 at our institution. Cases underwent surgical interventions for UI following RP. Controls had RP during the study period but did not have an intervention for UI following RP. We used the UI scale of the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC) 26 to: (1) quantify post-RP UI before and after UI intervention overall and for specific surgical procedures; (2) evaluate the significance of improvement in post-RP UI before and after UI intervention and (3) identify controls with levels of post-RP UI that were comparable to the cases. RESULTS: Two thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight RPs were performed; 48 patients underwent further surgical intervention (39 slings, 9 artificial urinary sphincter, AUS). For 20 cases with complete EPIC UI data (15 slings, 5 AUS), the median (IQR) pre-UI intervention score was 27.00 (IQR 22.75-42.75). Improvement was significant overall (p < 0.001) and for slings (p = 0.001). 71/2085 controls had post-prostatectomy UI scores ≤ 27.0, suggesting that they may have benefited from a post-RP surgical intervention for UI. CONCLUSION: Data support the effectiveness of surgery to treat post-RP UI. A sizeable population of unidentified men may benefit from a surgical intervention to treat urinary incontinence after RP.
PURPOSE: To examine outcomes of surgical procedures for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy (post-RP UI) and to identify patients who may benefit from a surgical intervention to treat post-RP UI. METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) from July 2004 through July 2016 at our institution. Cases underwent surgical interventions for UI following RP. Controls had RP during the study period but did not have an intervention for UI following RP. We used the UI scale of the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC) 26 to: (1) quantify post-RP UI before and after UI intervention overall and for specific surgical procedures; (2) evaluate the significance of improvement in post-RP UI before and after UI intervention and (3) identify controls with levels of post-RP UI that were comparable to the cases. RESULTS: Two thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight RPs were performed; 48 patients underwent further surgical intervention (39 slings, 9 artificial urinary sphincter, AUS). For 20 cases with complete EPIC UI data (15 slings, 5 AUS), the median (IQR) pre-UI intervention score was 27.00 (IQR 22.75-42.75). Improvement was significant overall (p < 0.001) and for slings (p = 0.001). 71/2085 controls had post-prostatectomy UI scores ≤ 27.0, suggesting that they may have benefited from a post-RP surgical intervention for UI. CONCLUSION: Data support the effectiveness of surgery to treat post-RP UI. A sizeable population of unidentified men may benefit from a surgical intervention to treat urinary incontinence after RP.
Authors: Christof Börgermann; Albert Kaufmann; Herbert Sperling; Manfred Stöhrer; Herbert Rübben Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2010-07-09 Impact factor: 5.594