OBJECTIVES: To present recent data on the epidemiology of urinary incontinence in prostate cancer (PCa). To review the incidence of urinary incontinence, its impact on quality of life and related pharmacoeconomic features. METHODS: We performed a bibliographic review about the complications of the various therapeutic options for PCa including radical prostatectomy (RP) (open, laparoscopic and robotic), external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, cryotherapy, and high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). RESULTS: The lack of uniformity for urinary incontinence definition, for its evaluation, and for the way to report it makes the interpretation of functional results and impact on quality of life after any treatment option difficult and uneven. Generally, we documented that urinary incontinence after treatment appears more often in patients undergoing radical surgery. Nevertheless, we stated that neurovascular bundle preservation, performance of the procedure in high volume centers, by high volume surgeons, and development of robotic surgery may positively influence the global outcomes of this technique. Moderate incontinence is less frequent after external beam radiotherapy, but the association of rectal pain and diarrhea, in up to 40% of the patients, worsens voiding symptoms. Irritative and obstructive voiding symptoms after perineal brachytherapy are especially associated with long term erectile dysfunction as well as rectal morbidity. In the case of cryotherapy and HIFU the available studies are case series and there are not randomized studies comparing them with the primary treatment of localized PCa. CONCLUSIONS: Each treatment modality for PCa is associated with a different pattern of changes in the urinary, sexual, intestinal and hormonal related quality of life domains. Two key factors when evaluating incontinence are information about continence before the procedure and the use of validated, self-administered evaluation means. Although technical improvements in all procedures should contribute to diminish the impact of complications, we should not forget the trend to the association of therapies- multimodal therapy- has a higher complication profile. Therefore, they should be reserved for patients in whom a benefit has been proved.
OBJECTIVES: Update on the urodynamic evaluation in patients with prostate cancer who have incontinence. METHODS: To review the urodynamic studies in prostate cancer patients who suffer from incontinence, irrespective of the treatment carried out. RESULTS: The largest amount of information on urodynamic studies in patients with prostate cancer and incontinence was found in those with post-prostatectomy incontinence. There is much more limited work on irradiated patients, and after medical treatment. CONCLUSION: The urodynamic study in these patients may help clarify the etiopathogenic mechanisms of incontinence, try to predict risk factors before treatment and help the therapeutic decision making. Further studies are needed, especially in patients undergoing radiotherapy, to further assess the mechanisms involved in lower urinary tract abnormalities that occur in these patients.
OBJECTIVES: In patients with localized prostate cancer and life expectancy longer than 10 years, radical prostatectomy (RP) remains the Gold Standard. Radical surgery must achieve good oncological and functional outcomes with early continence and potency. In expert hands RP offers very low post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence rates. To analyze functional outcomes regarding urinary incontinence (UI) after RP in our centre in the last ten years. METHODS: We have performed a retrospective study of the 137 patients who had a radical prostatectomy (open retropubic or laparoscopic) on the General University Hospital of Elche from 1998 to 2008. Two patient groups were analyzed, patients who had surgery from 1998 to 2003, and those who had surgery from 2004 to 2008. Stress UI rates after RP were determined in both groups at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months following surgery with patient pad day usage. Urethrovesical anastomosis strictures were also analyzed in each group and their resolution. RESULTS: 15 patients were excluded from the initial 137 because cT3 stage was detected, remaining 122 prostatectomies with <cT2c stage in the study. Average age was 67 years (50-74). Mean preoperative PSA was 8.1 ng/ml (4.5-25). Biopsy Gleason score was < 6 in 70% (85/122) and 7-8 in 30 % (37/122). In the period between 1998 and 2003, 49 patients un- derwent surgery and results were: initially continent 28.5% (14/49), continent after one month: 6.1% (3/49), at 3 months: 12.2% (6/49), six months 8.1% (4/49) and at a year: 22.4% (11/49). 20.4% (10/49) remain with mild incontinence and moderate/severe 2% (1/49). In this period 78% of the patients remain continent and 22% incontinent. In the period 2004-2008, 73 radical prostatectomies were performed with the following continence rates: initial continence 44% (32/73), after one month 0 patients, 3 months 6.8 % (5/73), 6 months 12.3 % (9/73), a year later 24.6 % (18/73). Mild incontinence was observed in 8.2% (6/73) and moderatesevere in 4% (3/73). 88% of the patients achieved continence and 12% remain incontinent. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary incontinence is a low frequency disorder in patients who undergo RP. Continence rates have been improving during the last years along with surgical technique and urologic expertise. Anti-incontinence devices after PR are rarely necessary and use is overrated.
External beam radiotherapy is consolidated like radical treatment for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. In addition, more and more studies show its effectiveness as much in postoperative as in salvage intention. Before choosing a therapeutic option, it is important to know the baseline state of the patients and the possible side effects of the treatment. In that way, different questionnaires and toxicity scales are at our disposal. Acute effects, during the treatment and the following weeks, are due to irritating and inflammatory symptoms. Chronic toxicity, months or years after radiotherapy, are consequence of the fibrosis and ischemia, as well as of alterations at the myogenic and neuronal level. Urinary incontinence is a relatively uncommon symptom among patients who have been treated with radiotherapy. But, due to the profound impact on the quality of life of our patients, it is necessary to identify patients at higher risk. Antecedent of transurethral resection of the prostate, before or after the irradiation, and severity of acute genitourinary toxicity increase the risk of developing incontinence.
OBJECTIVES: The development of urinary symptoms after brachytherapy is very frequent, reaching a maximum between the first and third month after the implant and returning back to normal around one year. The incidence of acute urinary retention varies between 1.5 and 27%. A low percentage of patients (0-8.7%) will need surgery to solve an extended urinary retention or severe obstructive voiding symptoms. Alphablockers may be useful to alleviate voiding symptoms after the implant, although they do not reduce the need for surgery.There are several predictive clinical factors for development of urinary complications. A patient with high IPPS score before implant, large size prostate, obstructive functional signs (Low Q max, high postvoid residual, and obstruction urodynamic parameters) has a high risk for urinary retention or extended urinary symptoms. This has repercussion on the quality of life of the patient, making them candidates to other therapies. The performance of a peripheral implant technique (guaranteeing low doses at urethra) and avoiding the urethral plane when inserting the needles may minimize urethral damage associated with development of urinary complications. Urinary incontinence after brachytherapy is a rare complication, but its frequency increases dramatically after transurethral resection of the prostate or requiring it to solve a sustained urinary retention. It is fundamental to know this circumstance to inform the patient adequately and to plan the most careful TURP.
Urinary artificial sphincter (UAS) is currently the gold standard treatment for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. 5-25% of the patients undergoing radical prostatectomy develop urinary incontinence. This complication generates important deterioration in the quality of life of these patients. Conservative and minimally invasive treatments, such as Kegel exercises, use of pads, drugs, and electrostimulation, or minor surgery have been used without success. This review summarizes the advantages and complications of the urinary artificial sphincter and its efficacy in the management of urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy.
OBJECTIVES: To diffuse the concept and implantation surgical technique of a new prosthesis for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence, the Flow Secure artificial urinary sphincter.METHODS: The prosthesis is a single silicone piece fi-lled with saline solution which has the following parts: (1) Pressure regulation reservoir, (2) assistance reservoir for stress situations, (3) control pump with self-sealant port and (4) a cuff. One of the main characteristics is the self-sealant port enables pressure adjustment depending of the clinical needs of the patient as many times as necessary.RESULTS: The surgical technique is simple and the level of continence achieved excellent. The only complication inherent to the Flow Secure design is perforation of the cuff during the act of pressurization, but it has been corrected by designing a new control pump which can not be punctured. Self limited scrotal edema/hematoma are frequent; they can be avoided minimizing the time of trocar use. The remainder complications are common with the AMS 800 and other implantable prosthesis.CONCLUSIONS: Despite midterm good results, we need to wait for a greater number of patients with the Flow Secure sphincter and longer follow up to determine the definitive role of this prosthesis for the treatment of urinary incontinence
OBJECTIVES: Stress urinary incontinence alter radical prostatectomy is one of the most worrisome sequelae for the patient and urologist. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the indications of the suburethral mesh Invance®, giving details on our preoperative evaluation and indication, surgical technique, and the correlation between preoperative findings and functional results.METHODS: Between February 2006 and January 2009 27 patients underwent surgery. All of them had more than one year of follow up after prostatectomy, urodynamic study and preoperative cystoscopy. Continence was evaluated by the number of pads/day and the ICIQ-UI SF questionnaire. Through a perineal incision three titanium screws with a polipropylene suture were inserted in each ischiopubic rami, and a silicon/polipropylene mesh (Invance ®) is affixed to them, compressing the bulbar urethra. Patients were divided into two groups: good prognosis (1-2 pads/day without urodynamic anomalies in the filling phase) and bad prognosis (3 pads/day, history of radiotherapy or bladder neck incision, and urodynamic anomalies). Cure was defined as a patient not needing pads, and improvement was defined as decrease in the number of pads per day.RESULTS: Median follow up after Invance ® was 18 months (4-38). Nine patients used one pad/day, 10 used two, and eight used three pads /day. Six cases had underwent previous bladder neck incision and three radiotherapy.Globally, 20 patients (74%) were cured and five (19%) had improved. Cure rate was 100% in the good prognosis group and 61% in the bad prognosis group (p=0.03).No intraoperative complications were registered. During the immediate postoperative period, one patient required cystostomy tube for 10 days. Seven patients (26%) presented perineal discomfort; neither de novo urgency nor urethral erosion nor sling explants due to infection were registered.CONCLUSIONS: Invance ® is a safe technique that guarantees a high continence rate in selected patients. It is a reproducible operation and, with a midterm follow up, no loss of continence has been observed, and the risk of urethral erosion is null in our experience. Patients with mild-moderate incontinence, without urodynamic anomalies nor previous radiotherapy are the ideal candidates.
OBJECTIVES: To summarize the lessons learnt after having performed more than 250 AdVance® sling procedures. Postprostatectomy incontinence is a depressing reality that is often underestimated by the prostate surgeon. The practiced gold standard for treating severe stress urinary incontinence has been the artificial urinary sphincter. No such consensus exists for mild to moderate incontinence. This paper is about an incontinence operation with the goal to support postprostatectomy sphincter laxity.METHODS: The hypothesis of postprostatectomy sphincter laxity is new, as well as restoring continence by proximal relocation of the proximal corpus spongiosum. Abstracts dealing with these issues are summarized. Selected points of technique are highlighted, including modifications that have been made along the way. Lastly the first and last 20 patients treated in this series of 250 patients are compared in terms of operative indication, surgical technique and treatment outcome. Some definitions are added for clarity. RESULTS: It could be demonstrated that the final position of the AdVance® sling is retroluminal, i.e. 5-10mm dorsal/ behind the lumen of the membranous urethra (=sphincteric urethra). Comparing the first 20 to the last 20, there were no treatment failures in the latter. A two year follow-up showed a continence rate of 65% in the first group, compared to a 85% continence rate in the second group taking into account the short median follow-up of 4.1.months in the latter. Tunneling the sling subcutaneously decreased postoperative loosening significantly.CONCLUSION: The AdVance® sling is a safe method of treating mild to moderate postprostatectomy incontinence, with no erosions in this series of patients. The hypothesis of sphincter laxity seems to play a definitive role in the pathophysiology of male incontinence. Correction of this urethral support descent or “prolapse” seems to be highly effective. Further studies are needed to accurately define the exaxt mechanism of action of the AdVance® sling
OBJECTIVES: Prostate cancer early detection campaigns have led to the diagnosis of a greater number of patients with organ-confined disease candidates for intention-to-cure treatment. Radical prostatectomy is one of these treatments; despite the technical advances with the development of laparoscopic or robotic operations it still has urine incontinence as a side effect affecting patient`s quality of life.METHODS/RESULTS: Based on the experience in the Urology Department at Hospital La Paz we describe the technique and our results, comparing with a bibliographic review of other techniques used for the treatment of urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy from the Medline database.CONCLUSIONS: The insertion of the paraurethral ProACTTM is the treatment of choice for mild-moderate incontinence after radical prostatectomy in our environment due to its high success rate and low morbidity, technical easiness, and adequate cost and resources requirements.
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a symptom appearing in both males and females. Pharmacological treatment has demonstrated to be effective for female SUI, but its role for treatment in males is controversial. This review evaluates the various types of drugs, their effects, and levels of efficacy in the studies.
Urinary incontinente is an existent complication secondary to the treatment of prostate cancer. It has a difficult management when medical or surgical treatment have not been effective.The objective is to describe pelvic floor training and to explain palliative technics in male incontinence. Patients should learn pelvic floor exercises in a correct way and it is recommended to practice them systematically. We describe penile compression devices and permanent catheters. We evaluate absorbent products together with their indications and caractheristics.