Surgical treatment of stress incontinence in men

EAU guidelines on surgical treatment of urinary incontinence

CONTEXT

The European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on urinary incontinence published in March 2012 have been rewritten based on an independent systematic review carried out by the EAU guidelines panel using a sustainable methodology.

OBJECTIVE

We present a short version here of the full guidelines on the surgical treatment of patients with urinary incontinence, with the aim of dissemination to a wider audience.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Evidence appraisal included a pragmatic review of existing systematic reviews and independent new literature searches based on Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) questions. The appraisal of papers was carried out by an international panel of experts, who also collaborated in a series of consensus discussions, to develop concise structured evidence summaries and action-based recommendations using a modified Oxford system.

EVIDENCE SUMMARY

The full version of the guidance is available online (www.uroweb.org/guidelines/online-guidelines/). The guidance includes algorithms that refer the reader back to the supporting evidence and have greater accessibility in daily clinical practice. Two original meta-analyses were carried out specifically for these guidelines and are included in this report.

CONCLUSIONS

These new guidelines present an up-to-date summary of the available evidence, together with clear clinical algorithms and action-based recommendations based on the best available evidence. Where high-level evidence is lacking, they present a consensus of expert panel opinion.

ZSI 375 artificial urinary sphincter for male urinary incontinence: a preliminary study

OBJECTIVE

To assess retrospectively the safety and efficacy of an artificial urinary sphincter, the ZSI 375 device (Zephyr Surgical Implants, Geneva, Switzerland), in male patients with moderate-to-severe stress urinary incontinence after a prostate or bladder intervention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The ZSI 375 device is a one-piece device consisting of an adjustable cuff, moulded to fit around the urethra, which is connected by a tube to a pump and a pressure-regulating tank. It has no abdominal reservoir. Patients underwent a perineal incision for cuff placement and an inguinal incision for pump and tank scrotal placement. Complications and pads used to manage incontinence were recorded.

RESULTS

Between May 2009 and April 2011, 36 patients underwent ZSI 375 device placement. The median (range) follow-up was 15.4 (6-28) months. No patient experienced bladder overactivity, chronic urinary retention, or any other adverse effect after device activation. Complications leading to device removal arose in four patients (one case of erosion, three cases of infection). Social continence (0 or 1 pad/day) was achieved in 28/36 patients (78%) at 3 months and 26/36 patients (73%) at 6 months after device activation. In 12/14 patients for a sphincter closure pressure range of 60-70 cm H2O, in 3/3 patients for a range of 70-80 cm H2O and in 2/11 for a range of 90-100 cm, H2O social continence was achieved only after increasing the pressure of the cuff by trans-scrotal injection of saline.

CONCLUSIONS

The ZSI 375 device is safe and effective but our follow-up may not have been long enough to identify all potential complications. Further research is needed to confirm these results and extend our investigation, for instance, to the peno-scrotal approach.

[Salvage therapy with artificial urinary sphincter after Advance™ male sling failure for post-prostatectomy incontinence: a first clinical experience]

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical outcome following artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation after failure of Advance™ sub-urethral male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI).

METHODS

A prospective evaluation was conducted about consecutive patients who received an AUS after failure of Advance™ therapy in one tertiary reference center. Evaluation included medical history, pad use and operative data (duration, cuff size, technical difficulties). Follow-up was scheduled at 1, 6, 12 months and yearly thereafter. Clinical outcome was evaluated by pad use, patient global impression of improvement (PGI-I) scale and assessment of side effects. Cure was defined as no pad usage.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were included in this evaluation. Median follow-up was 20 months (12-43). No patient was lost to follow-up. Four patients had a history of radiation therapy and all patients had mild or moderate PPI with previous failed Advance™ surgery. Median (range) operative time was 47 minutes (40-60). No technical problem occurred during AUS implantation. Hospital stay duration and catheterization duration were respectively 2 days and 24 hours in all but one case. At last follow-up, 10/12 patients (83%) were cured and fully satisfied. Two were improved, wearing only one pad per day. Postoperative complications were noted in two cases (17%) (one case of cutaneous erosion and one case of superficial iliac wound infection).

CONCLUSIONS

AUS implantation is feasible in patients who have undergone Advance™ male sling implantation. Mid-term results of this procedure are comparable to those obtained after first line AUS implantation.

Current trends in the management of post-prostatectomy incontinence

One of the annoying complications of radical prostatectomy is urinary incontinence. Post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) causes a significant impact on the patient's health-related quality of life. Although PPI is stress urinary incontinence caused by intrinsic sphincter deficiency in most cases, bladder dysfunction and vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis can induce urine leakage also. Exact clinical assessments, such as a voiding diary, incontinence questionnaire, pad test, urodynamic study, and urethrocystoscopy, are necessary to determine adequate treatment. The initial management of PPI is conservative treatment including lifestyle interventions, pelvic floor muscle training with or without biofeedback, and bladder training. An early start of conservative treatment is recommended during the first year. If the conservative treatment fails, surgical treatment is recommended. Surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy can be divided into minimally invasive and invasive treatments. Minimally invasive treatment includes injection of urethral bulking agents, male suburethral sling, and adjustable continence balloons. Invasive treatment includes artificial urinary sphincter implantation, which is still the gold standard and the most effective treatment of PPI. However, the demand for minimally invasive treatment is increasing, and many urologists consider male suburethral slings to be an acceptable treatment for PPI. The male sling is usually recommended for patients with persistent mild or moderate incontinence. It is necessary to improve our understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of PPI and to compare different procedures for the development of new and potentially better treatment options.

[Management of urinary incontinence after orthotopic urinary diversion]

Orthotopic urinary diversion (OUD) is performed in almost half of all radical cystectomies. This review presents an overview of the incidence, pathophysiology, and management of urinary incontinence (UI) after OUD. Daytime and nighttime UI are reported in up to 15% and 45% of cases after OUD, respectively. UI after OUD is more frequent in women. Stress incontinence is the most common reason for daytime urinary leakage, while an absent vesicourethral reflex with reduced external sphincter muscle tone is associated with nighttime UI. Conservative management has limited therapeutic value in UI after OUD. Surgical approaches include adjustable and nonadjustable slings as well as the ProACT® system in mild stress UI. Implantation of the artificial urinary sphincter system AMS 800® is the standard treatment for stress UI after OUD. Very limited data exist regarding results after implantation of newer artificial urinary sphincter systems such as the FlowSecure® and the Zephyr® ZSI 375 after OUD.

Population based study of long-term rates of surgery for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Urinary incontinence can be a significant complication of radical prostatectomy. It can be treated with post-prostatectomy surgical procedures. The long-term rate of patients who undergo these surgeries, including artificial urinary sphincter or urethral sling insertion, is not well described. We examined the long-term rate of post-prostatectomy incontinence surgery and factors influencing it.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a population based study of 25,346 men who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer in Ontario, Canada between 1993 and 2006. We used hospital and cancer registry administrative data to identify patients from this cohort who were later treated with surgery for urinary incontinence.

RESULTS

Of the 25,346 patients 703 (2.8%) underwent artificial urinary sphincter insertion and 282 (1.1%) underwent urethral sling placement a median of 2.9 years after prostatectomy. The probability of an artificial urinary sphincter/sling procedure increased with time from prostatectomy. Cumulative 5, 10 and 15-year Kaplan-Meier rates of an artificial urinary sphincter/sling procedure were 2.6% (95% CI 2.4-2.8), 3.8% (95% CI 3.6-4.1) and 4.8% (95% CI 4.4-5.3), respectively. Factors predicting surgery for incontinence were patient age at radical prostatectomy (HR 1.24 per decade, 95% CI 1.11-1.38, p = 0.0002), radiotherapy after surgery (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.36-1.90, p <0.0001) and surgeon volume (49 or greater prostatectomies per year) (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.77, p <0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Of patients who undergo radical prostatectomy 5% are expected to be treated with surgery for urinary incontinence during a 15-year period. Increasing patient age, radiation treatment and low surgeon volume are associated with significantly higher risk.

The retrourethral transobturator sling suspension in the treatment of male urinary stress incontinence: results of a single institution experience

Objective. To evaluate functional outcome of the retrourethral transobturator sling suspension (RTS) in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) caused by prior prostate surgery. Methods. The RTS (AdVance male sling) was implanted in 32 patients who suffered from mild to severe postsurgical-treatment incontinence at the University Hospital Ulm from September 2010 to September 2011 including 10 patients with prior radiation therapy. Functional data (uroflowmetry, daily pad use, and postvoid residual urine) as well as quality of life with impact of urinary problems (ICIQ-UI SF) were prospectively assessed at baseline and during followup. Results. After a median followup of 9 months (range, 3-14) the incontinence cure rate (no pad usage) was 56.2% and the improvement rate (1-2 pads/day or ≥50% reduction) was 21.9%. No improvement was observed in 21.9%. Daily pad use and ICIQ-UI SF score improved significantly. No major perioperative complications occurred. Postoperatively, 15.6% of the patients exhibited transient acute urinary retention which resolved without further treatment after a maximum of 3 weeks. One patient underwent sling explantation due to dislocation and persistent perineal pain. Conclusions. The implantation of the RTS is a safe and effective procedure in selected patients with SUI resulting from prostate surgery.

Artificial urinary sphincter: long-term results and patient satisfaction

The published evidence concerning the safety, efficacy, and patient satisfaction for implantation of the current model of the artificial urinary sphincter (AS 800) in men with post prostatectomy urinary incontinence was the objective of this review. A Pub Med English language literature search from 1995 to 2011 was performed. A majority of men who undergo AUS implantation for post prostatectomy urinary incontinence achieve satisfactory results (0 to 1 pad per day). Infection rates range from 0.46 to 7%, cuff erosion rates range from 3.8 to 10%, and urethral atrophy ranges from 9.6 to 11.4%. Kaplan-Meier 5 year projections for freedom from any reoperation were 50% for a small series and 79.4% for a larger series. Kaplan-Meier projections for freedom from mechanical failure were 79% at 5 years and 72% at 10 years. In another series 10 year projections for freedom from mechanical failure were 64%. Although the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is the gold standard for the treatment of this disorder, most men will continue to need at least one pad per day for protection, and they are subject to a significant chance of future AUS revision or replacement.

A new quadratic sling for male stress incontinence: retrograde leak point pressure as a measure of urethral resistance

PURPOSE

Objective methods are essential for evaluating post-prostatectomy incontinence. While symptom score and pad weight may be the most useful methods to evaluate preoperative vs postoperative continence, neither is useful for guiding intraoperative sling tension. The Virtue quadratic sling (Coloplast, Humlebaek, Denmark) is a new device for treating post-prostatectomy incontinence that combines a transobturator and prepubic surgical approach. We examined urethral resistance by measuring retrograde leak point pressure during key portions of the surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 22 consecutive men who elected to undergo Virtue sling surgery were evaluated with retrograde leak point pressure before and during the surgery. Retrograde leak point pressure was measured via perfusion sphincterometry at baseline, after transobturator tensioning, after prepubic tensioning, and after transobturator and prepubic arms were secured in place.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 70 years. Mean baseline retrograde leak point pressure was 33.4 ± 8.8 cm water. After transobturator tensioning, mean retrograde leak point pressure increased to 43.3 ± 6.8 cm water. After prepubic tensioning mean retrograde leak point pressure was 55.8 ± 8.7, and final retrograde leak point pressure after transobturator and prepubic fixation increased to 68.8 ± 6.0 cm water. Each mean retrograde leak point pressure value was significantly higher than the preceding value.

CONCLUSIONS

The Virtue sling provides ventral urethral elevation using a transobturator approach, and a long segment of urethral compression against the genitourinary diaphragm via a straightforward prepubic technique without the risks of bone screws or retropubic needle passage. Transobturator and prepubic components of the quadratic fixation contributed to increasing urethral resistance as measured by intraoperative retrograde leak point pressure. This quadratic technique has a potentially greater ability to provide urethral compression than does a purely perineal or transobturator sling.

The male sling for post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a review of contemporary sling designs and outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To examine the outcomes and adverse events associated with novel male sling designs described in the last decade.

METHODS

A literature review was carried out using Medline, EmBase, Cochrane Registered Trials Database and the Center for Reviews and Dissemination Database.

RESULTS

Three principal slings are described in the literature. The bone-anchored sling has success rates of 40-88%, with some series having a mean follow-up of 36-48 months. It is associated with a mesh infection rate of 2-12%, which usually requires sling explantation. The retrourethral transobturator sling has a success rate of 76-91% among three large case series with follow-ups of 12-27 months. There is a low reported explantation rate. The adjustable retropubic sling has a success rate of 72-79% with follow-ups of 26-45 months. Erosion (3-13%) and infection (3-11%) can lead to explantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Most male slings have a similar reported efficacy. Most case series define success as either dry or improved. True cure rates are lower. Mid- and long-term data are now available that indicate the male sling is a viable option for PPI. The use of male slings in severe UI, radiated patients, and non-radical prostatectomy patients is still unclear. Further study is needed to try and define criteria for the use of male slings, and to directly compare different procedures.

Mid-term complications after placement of the male adjustable suburethral sling: a single center experience

PURPOSE

In recent years various sling systems have been proposed as a successful treatment option for male stress urinary incontinence. Reports about complication rates and failures are still scarce.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically reevaluated 29 male patients who received an Argus® suburethral sling for stress urinary incontinence between October 2006 and July 2007.

RESULTS

Overall 24 patients (83%) experienced a total of 37 complications at a median followup of 35 months (range 29 to 45), including 10 (35%) in acute urinary retention. The sling was removed in 10 patients (35%) due to urethral erosion (3), infection (2), system dislocation (2), urinary retention (2) and persistent pain (1). Eight men (27%) complained of significant perineal pain, necessitating continuous oral analgesics. In 1 patient ureteral reimplantation was done due to ureteral erosion from a dislocated sling. At followup only 5 men (17%) remained dry while 21 (72%) were dissatisfied with the clinical outcome. No available clinical variables were statistically significantly associated with any grade or high grade complications even on univariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study cohort the Argus suburethral sling was associated with serious mechanical and infectious complications, and sparse functional results with negative impact on patient quality of life. Based on the results of this study significant changes are warranted in the sling system and in the implantation technique.

Incontinence

Urinary incontinence is a common problem among older women and men. Older adults are reluctant to seek treatment, and health care providers should inquire about symptoms. Treatment of urinary incontinence includes multiple, office-based modalities, such as behavioral approaches, medications, and devices. Older adults may also consider surgical options to improve urinary incontinence. Special consideration should be given to older adults with cognitive impairment and incontinence.

Surgery for stress urinary incontinence due to presumed sphincter deficiency after prostate surgery

BACKGROUND

Incontinence after prostatectomy for benign or malignant disease is a well known and often a feared outcome. Although small degrees of incidental incontinence may go virtually unnoticed, larger degrees of incontinence can have a major impact on a man's quality of life.Conceptually, postprostatectomy incontinence may be caused by sphincter malfunction and/or bladder dysfunction. The majority of men with post-prostatectomy incontinence (60 to 100%) have stress urinary incontinence, which is the complaint of involuntary urinary leakage on effort or exertion, or on sneezing or coughing. This may be due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency and may be treated with surgery for optimal management of incontinence. Detrusor dysfunction is more common after surgery for benign prostatic disease.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of surgical treatment for urinary incontinence related to presumed sphincter deficiency after prostate surgery for either benign LUTS secondary to BPH (transurethral resection of prostate (TURP), photo vaporization of the prostate, laser enucleation of the prostate and open prostatectomy) or radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer (retropubic, perineal, laparoscopic, or robotic).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 28 June 2010), MEDLINE (January 1966 to January 2010), EMBASE (January 1988 to January 2010), LILACS (January 1982 to January 2010) and the reference lists of relevant articles, handsearched conference proceedings and contacted investigators to locate studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised trials that include surgical treatments of urinary incontinence after prostate surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the trials identified, appraised quality of papers and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one study with 45 participants met the inclusion criteria. Men were divided in two subgroups (minimal or total incontinence) and each group was randomized to artificial urethral sphincter (AUS) implantation or Macroplastique injection. Follow-up ranged from six to 120 months. In the trial as a whole, the men treated with AUS were more likely to be dry (18/20, 82%) than those who had the injectable treatment (11/23, 46%) (OR 5.67, 95% CI 1.28 to 25.10). However, this effect was only statistically significant for the men with more severe ('total') incontinence (OR 8.89, 95% CI 1.40 to 56.57) and the confidence intervals were wide. There were more severe complications in the group undergoing AUS, and the costs were higher.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence available at present is limited because only one small randomised clinical trial was identified. Although the result is favourable for the implantation of AUS in the group with severe incontinence, this result should be considered with caution due to the small sample size and uncertain methodological quality of the study found.

Urological Disorders in Men

Urinary incontinence (UI) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are 2 common urogenital problems in men. UI is associated with involuntary leakage of urine and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) of urgency, frequency, and nocturia. Types of UI include functional, urge, stress, and overflow. Treatment for UI is based on the type of incontinence, patient-specific factors, and treatment preferences of both patients and health care providers. Options for the management of UI include environmental modifications, disposable incontinence products, pelvic floor exercises, pharmacotherapy, surgically implanted devices, and intermittent catheterization. BPH may be also associated with LUTS. Patient symptoms, assessed with a measurement tool such as the American Urological Association Symptom Index (AUASI), serve as the basis for determining treatment. Management approaches for BPH include pharmacotherapy, surgery, and minimally invasive procedures. Anticholinergic drugs as well as α-receptor antagonists and 5-α reductase inhibitors, either alone or in combination, are effective and useful for LUTS unresponsive to traditional pharmacotherapy. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) can eliminate symptoms of BPH but is associated with relatively more complications than other available surgical and minimally invasive procedures.

Stem cells for the treatment of urinary incontinence

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is highly prevalent. As of now, there is no minimally invasive long-term treatment available. Adult stem cells are nonimmunogenic and have the ability to self-renew and to differentiate into multiple cell types. Over the past decade, in vivo studies have described periurethral injections of adult-derived stem cells for the treatment of SUI. The ultimate goal has been to achieve a permanent cure for SUI by restoration of the intrinsic and extrinsic urethral sphincter and the surrounding connective tissue, including peripheral nerves and blood vessels. For this purpose, future studies need to focus on delivery systems, cell survival, and functional improvement of the urethral closure mechanism, including improvement of innervation and vascularization.

Are male slings for post-prostatectomy incontinence a valid option?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Stress incontinence in men is still a common problem after surgical treatment of prostatic disease. This article reviews the techniques and results of recently described surgical slings available to treat male stress incontinence.

RECENT FINDINGS

Medium-term follow-up (mean 3-4 years) of patients treated with bone-anchored slings has been recently published, suggesting a success rate (cured or improved) of 70-80%. Short-term follow-up (mean of 6-12 months) of transobturator retrourethral slings demonstrates a success rate of 62-83%. Novel sling designs include mechanisms to manipulate the tension postoperatively and inside-out transobturator trocar passage. Common complications associated with slings are acute urinary retention and perineal pain. Rare complications include urethral erosion and infection. Retropubic approaches are associated with a risk of bladder perforation.

SUMMARY

Male slings are a valid option for treating male stress incontinence, and do offer several advantages over the artificial urinary sphincter. However, long-term data and multicenter series are needed in order to compare directly with the artificial urinary sphincter.

Treatment options for male stress urinary incontinence

The diagnosis and management of male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is complex. Various etiologies exist, with radical prostatectomy being the most common cause in men seeking treatment. SUI in this setting is often temporary and resolves within the first postoperative year. Therefore, it is important to understand the natural history of male SUI before initiating treatment. Generally, the initial management of SUI that persists after 12 months consists of conservative measures, such as pelvic floor muscle exercises. Several treatments are available for men whose continence does not improve after pelvic floor muscle exercises. In order of increasing complexity they are urethral bulking agents, male slings, and the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). With over 30 years of published data suggesting excellent long-term outcomes, the AUS is considered the gold standard treatment of male SUI. Male slings have recently demonstrated efficacy for selected patients and are likely to be used more often in the future as experience with these devices grows.

Duloxetine for mild to moderate postprostatectomy incontinence: preliminary results of a randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Duloxetine is effective in the management of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in women but has been poorly evaluated in the treatment of SUI following radical prostatectomy (RP).

OBJECTIVE

To establish the superiority of duloxetine over placebo in SUI after RP.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We conducted a prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, monocentric superiority trial. After a placebo run-in period of 2 wk, patients with SUI after RP were randomised to receive either 80mg of duloxetine daily or matching placebo for 3 mo.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome measure was the relative variation in incontinence episodes frequency (IEF) at the end of study compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes included quality of life (QoL) measures (Incontinence Impact Questionnaire Short Form [IIQ-SF], Urogenital Distress Inventory Short Form [UDI-SF], Incontinence Quality of Life [I-QoL]), symptom scores (Urinary Symptom Profile [USP] questionnaire, International Consultation on Incontinence/World Health Organisation Short Form questionnaire [ICIQ-SF], the Beck Depression Inventory [BDI-II] questionnaire), 1-h pad test, and assessment of adverse events.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Thirty-one patients were randomised to either the treatment (n=16) or control group (n=15). Reduction in IEF was significant with duloxetine compared to placebo (mean±standard deviation [SD] variation: -52.2%±38.6 [range: -100 to +46] vs +19.0%±43.5 [range: -53 to +104]; mean difference: 71.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference: 41.0-101.4; p<0.0001). IIQ-SF total score, UDI-SF total score, SUI subscore of the USP questionnaire, and question 3 of the ICIQ-SF questionnaire showed improvement in the duloxetine group (p=0.006, p=0.02, p=0.0004, and p=0.003, respectively). Both treatments were well tolerated throughout the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Duloxetine is effective in the treatment of incontinence symptoms and improves QoL in patients with SUI after RP.

Mid-term evaluation of the transobturator male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence: focus on prognostic factors

OBJECTIVE

• To assess clinical outcomes at mid-term follow-up and determine preoperative factors associated with the failure of the Advance(TM) male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• A prospective evaluation was conducted of 136 consecutive patients implanted with the Advance(TM) male sling for mild to moderate stress urinary incontinence after prostatectomy. • Patients were preoperatively evaluated using medical history, ASA score, urodynamics, 24-h pad test and pad usage. • The clinical outcome was evaluated according to pad use and the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale and by assessment of side effects. 'Cure' was defined as no pad usage and 'improvement' as a decrease in pad use by >50%. • Factors related to functional outcome were studied by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

• After a mean ± SD (range) follow-up of 21 ± 6 (12-36) months, 62% of patients were cured, 16% improved and 22% not improved. • Failure (no cure or improvement) was associated with previous urethral stricture surgery (P= 0.013) and a 24-h pad-test >200 g/day (P= 0.026), and there was a trend for an association with previous radiation therapy (P= 0.053). • Age, learning curve and type of prostatectomy did not affect the results. • Immediate postoperative complications were limited to two cases of dysuria, one case of perineal haematoma and two cases of perineal paresthesia. During follow-up, 10% of patients had perineal pain and 14% of patients had mild dysuria. None required surgical management.

CONCLUSION

• The results of the present study, with a follow-up of up to 3 years, confirm that the Advance(TM) male sling is an efficient treatment for PPI. However, particular attention should be given to the preoperative data associated with failure.

Repeat retrourethral transobturator sling in the management of recurrent postprostatectomy stress urinary incontinence after failed first male sling

BACKGROUND

A failure rate between 20% and 45.5% after retrourethral transobturator sling (RTS) is reported. Recommendations for the management of persistent or recurrent postprostatectomy stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after failed male sling do not exist.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was the prospective evaluation of the efficacy of repeat RTS (RRTS) in patients after failed first RTS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Between March 2007 and August 2009, 35 patients with mild to severe SUI after failed first RTS were treated with a second AdVance sling (American Medical Systems, Minnetonka, MN, USA).

MEASUREMENTS

Preoperative and postoperative evaluation included daily pad use, 1-hr pad test, postvoiding residual (PVR) urine, uroflowmetry, and quality-of-life (QoL) scores.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

After 6 mo, 45.5% (15 of 33 patients) showed no pad use; 30.3% (10 of 33 patients), one dry "security" pad; 3% (1 of 33 patients), one wet pad; 6.1% (2 of 33 patients), two pads; 3% (1 of 33 patients), pad reduction ≥50%; and 12.1% (4 of 33 patients), treatment failure. After 16.6 mo, 34.5% (10 of 29 patients) showed no pad use; 37.9% (11 of 29 patients), one dry "security" pad; 3.4% (1 of 29 patients), one wet pad; 3.4% (1 of 29 patients), two pads; 10.3% (3 of 29 patients), pad reduction ≥50%; and 10.4% (3 of 29 patients), treatment failure. Daily pad use and pad weight decreased significantly. PVR and uroflowmetry results showed no significant change. QoL improved significantly. Postoperative acute urinary retention was observed in 23.6% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

RRTS is an effective and safe treatment option for the management of SUI after failed first RTS.