Post-Prostatectomy Urinary Incontinence: A Confluence of 3 Factors

Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
The Journal of urology (Impact Factor: 3.75). 03/2010; 183(3):871-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.011
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Urinary incontinence has a significant impact on the quality of life of patients who undergo radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. We reviewed available published data to analyze the etiology and prevention of this surgical complication.
A MEDLINE search of the literature on this topic was performed.
There was a wide disparity in the reported rates of urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy due to various reasons including definitions, patient selection and intraoperative technical factors.
Postoperative urinary incontinence has a major impact on patient satisfaction after radical prostatectomy. Attention to factors including patient selection, nuances of the surgical technique, and a more uniform, widespread agreement on the definition and instruments to measure postoperative incontinence is needed to enhance surgical outcomes. In addition, further research is needed to improve the diagnosis and treatment of urinary incontinence after prostate cancer surgery.

Download full-text


Available from: Michaella Maloney Prasad, Apr 09, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:: The study examined and compared continence rates in prostate cancer patients who had undergone either open retropubic prostatectomy (RRPE) or endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE). The core question was whether the surgical approach had an effect on the patients' continence status 3 months after surgery. METHODS:: We conducted a multicentric, longitudinal study in 7 German hospitals. Three hundred fifty prostate cancer patients (166 EERPE, 184 RRPE) were asked to self-assess symptoms associated with urinary incontinence (UI) 1 day before and 3 months after prostatectomy. Symptoms of UI were assessed using the EORTC QLQ-PR25 questionnaire. Urinary continence was defined according to (1) the use of no protective pad, (2) the use of up to a single protective pad in a 24-hour period, and (3) according to the patient's self-assessment. A binary regression model was employed to predict early continence status. RESULTS:: Three months after prostatectomy, 44% of patients who underwent EERPE and 40% of patients who underwent RRPE were completely continent. Patients who underwent nerve-sparing prostatectomy and patients younger than 65 years had a better chance of regaining urinary continence earlier. The surgical approach had no significant impact on the patients' continence status. Limitations of the study are a drop-out rate of 39% and sociodemographic and clinical differences between both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS:: Three months after prostatectomy, there were no significant differences between both treatment groups regarding urinary continence. The surgical approach had no significant effect on the patients' continence status. Higher age and non-nerve-sparing surgery are associated with a longer period of convalescence.
    Urologic Oncology 06/2011; 30(6). DOI:10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.10.013 · 3.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In recent years, despite improvement in the surgical technique, the prevalence of postprostatectomy incontinence has increased due to a rise in the number of radical prostatectomies performed annually. The aim of this review is to evaluate contemporary noninvasive and invasive treatment options for postprostatectomy incontinence. In August 2010, a review of the literature was performed using the Medline database. All articles concerning noninvasive and invasive treatment for postprostatectomy incontinence were included. No randomised controlled trials exist to compare currently used noninvasive and invasive treatments for postprostatectomy incontinence. Pelvic floor muscle training is recommended for the initial treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Additionally, antimuscarinic therapy should be applied for urgency or urge incontinence. For decades, the artificial urinary sphincter was the reference standard for persistent SUI. Nowadays, male slings are an alternative for men with mild to moderate postprostatectomy SUI.
    European Urology 03/2011; 59(6):985-96. DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.020 · 12.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Apical dissection and control of the dorsal vein complex (DVC) affects blood loss, apical positive margins, and urinary control during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP). To describe technique and outcomes for athermal DVC division followed by selective suture ligation (DVC-SSL) compared with DVC suture ligation followed by athermal division (SL-DVC). Retrospective study of prospectively collected data from February 2008 to July 2010 for 303 SL-DVC and 240 DVC-SSL procedures. RALP with comparison of DVC-SSL prior to anastomosis versus early SL-DVC prior to bladder-neck dissection. Blood loss, transfusions, operative time, apical and overall positive margins, urine leaks, catheterization duration, and urinary control at 5 and 12 mo evaluated using 1) the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index (EPIC) urinary function scale and 2) continence defined as zero pads per day. Men who underwent DVC-SSL versus SL-DVC were older (mean: 59.9 vs 57.8 yr, p<0.001), and relatively fewer white men underwent DVC-SSL versus SL-DVC (87.5% vs 96.7%, p<0.001). Operative times were also shorter for DVC-SSL versus SL-DVC (mean: 132 vs 147 min, p<0.001). Men undergoing DVC-SSL versus SL-DVC experienced greater blood loss (mean: 184.3 vs 175.6 ml, p=0.033), and one DVC-SSL versus zero SL-DVC were transfused (p=0.442). Overall (12.2% vs 12.0%, p=1.0) and apical (1.3% vs 2.7%, p=0.361) positive surgical margins were similar for DVC-SSL versus SL-DVC. Although 5-mo postoperative urinary function (mean: 72.9 vs 55.4, p<0.001) and continence (61.4% vs 39.6%, p<0.001) were better for DVC-SSL versus SL-DVC, 12-mo urinary outcomes were similar. In adjusted analyses, DVC-SSL versus SL-DVC was associated with shorter operative times (parameter estimate [PE]±standard error [SE]: 16.84±2.56, p<0.001), and better 5-mo urinary function (PE±SE: 19.93±3.09, p<0.001) and continence (odds ratio 3.39, 95% confidence interval 2.07-5.57, p<0.001). DVC-SSL versus SL-DVC improves early urinary control and shortens operative times due to fewer instrument changes with late versus early DVC control.
    European Urology 02/2011; 59(2):235-43. DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.043 · 12.48 Impact Factor