The penile clamp: Medieval pain or makeshift gain?

Penile compression devices for the treatment of urinary incontinence: current status and future prospects

INTRODUCTION

Urinary incontinence (UI), especially stress UI, is common after prostatectomy. Penile compression devices (PCDs) may be a safe, tolerable option for conservative management in men who are not candidates for or not interested in surgical intervention for their UI.

AREAS COVERED

This article examines the epidemiology of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI), and options for management. All available studies on PCDs are explored, including those on biomechanics, safety, tolerability, and user experience. History, availability of PCDs, and areas for future development are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

PCDs are an option for conservative management of PPI. They are recommended for those men without impairment in cognition, dexterity, or sensation. They should be worn for short periods of time and are best used during situations when incontinence might be precipitated. Overall, data suggest they are well tolerated and effective when tested, but large randomized comparative trials and studies of long-term use with relevant patient reported outcome measures are lacking. More studies are needed on commercially available PCDs. Biomechanical studies suggest that there are superior designs and materials both for efficacy and tolerability. With an aging population, and more older men going for prostate surgery, a larger market for these devices is likely.

Patients experience with the use of a penile clamp in post-prostatectomy incontinence - a prospective pilot study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of a penile clamp in managing urinary incontinence (UI) and its impact on perceived quality of life (QoL) amongst post-prostatectomy patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective pilot study was conducted including patients with post-prostatectomy UI treated with a penile clamp. Inclusion criteria consisted of UI after radical prostatectomy, good hand function, full cognitive function and a minimum penile length of 3 cm and a circumference of 5 cm. An appropriately sized penile clamp was selected during the first visit, and patients were given instructions on how to use it. The first follow-up was a scheduled phone call 1 week after the initial visit. Formal evaluations were performed prior to use of the penile clamp and again after 3 months of usage. These consisted of weighing pads during the daytime with evaluation of leakage, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF), incontinence-QoL (I-QoL) and a questionnaire specific for the penile clamp.

RESULTS

There were 22 patients included, and two were excluded due to reduced hand function and surgery before the study endpoint. The results showed a significant median reduction of urinary leakage of 57% at rest and 58% during physical activity. One complication was observed, as one patient developed a pinching ulcer, after extensive usage. ICIQ-SF showed an increase of 6% for the included patients (n = 20). Ten patients were satisfied with the clamp, and 15 would recommend the clamp to others.

CONCLUSION

The penile clamp shows promising results in reducing leakage with minimal risks of complications. It can be used as a treatment for patients awaiting surgery. However, patient selection is important regarding hand function, cognitive function and the penile anatomy.

Utility of a penile compression device for the quality of life in male patients with urinary incontinence after prostatectomy (the MORE study): a randomized prospective study

OBJECTIVES

To verify the effects of penile clamping on the degree of stress urinary incontinence and quality of life in post-radical prostatectomy patients.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients suffering from stress urinary incontinence after undergoing radical prostatectomy were enrolled. A total of 19 and 18 patients were analyzed in the non-clamp and clamp groups, respectively. The mean ages of the patients in non-clamp and clamp groups were 68.3 ± 7.1 years and 71.2 ± 4.8 years, respectively; the mean time after radical prostatectomy was 28.9 ± 44.0 months and 26.2 ± 39.0 months, respectively. The penile clamp used was the CLAMPMED® (URINE CONTROL CLAMP) size M (MURANAKA MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS Co., Ltd.). Specific urinary care pads (Sawayaka Pad for Men, Small Quantity®, Unicharm Corporation), were provided; the average daily usage was monitored for four weeks. The quality of life was evaluated using the King's Health Questionnaire. The average daily use of urinary care pads was significantly reduced in the clamp group than in the non-clamp group (-0.83 ± 1.51 vs. -0.16 ± 0.69, P = 0.0071). King's Health Questionnaire scores did not change significantly in either group. Wearing the CLAMPMED® reduced the amount of urinary incontinence but did not improve the quality of life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT1052230083). Registered 2 August, 2023.

Qualitative analysis of Amazon customer reviews of penile clamps for male urinary incontinence

AIMS

Penile clamps offer an alternative to manage male urinary incontinence in patients who are unfit for surgery. Patient experience with penile clamps is poorly understood. Our study elucidates patient opinions on commercially available penile clamps and the factors that associate with favorable and unfavorable opinions.

METHODS

We collected Amazon reviews of all penile clamps marketed for male urinary incontinence from November 2011 to January 2020 and qualitatively assessed the overall sentiment towards penile clamps, key praises and key complaints. Covariates such as designated Amazon star rating were further explored for association with coding patterns.

RESULTS

Amazon reviews of penile clamps were found to be more positive (n = 425) in overall sentiment than negative (n = 294). The most frequent praise was effective incontinence control (n = 334) and the most frequent complaint was bad design or material (n = 166). The majority of reviews were for lower priced penile clamps, had higher Amazon star ratings, were written for Wiesner-produced clamps, and were written more recently (i.e., 2015-2020). Penile clamps with higher Amazon star ratings were more often coded positive and with a praise compared to lower rated penile clamps.

CONCLUSIONS

Penile clamps are seen favorably by users as an effective treatment modality for male urinary incontinence. User reviews suggest opportunities for improvement in penile clamp design. The most frequently reviewed clamp seen positively is the Wiesner Incontinence Clamp Penile Clamp whereas the most frequently reviewed clamp seen negatively is the Pacey Cuff Male Incontinence Device.

Magnetic resonance imaging to estimate tissue deformations during penile clamp application: A case series

Background:

Penile clamps provide a means of preventing urinary incontinence in males following radical prostatectomy. In order for the devices to function, significant mechanical loads need to be applied to the penile tissues to close the urethra. However, such loads have the potential to cause damage to the vulnerable skin and underlying soft tissues. Accordingly, the study aimed to estimate the magnitudes of tissue deformations resulting from penile clamp application in three individual cases.

Methods:

Three individuals were recruited who currently use penile clamps to manage urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy. Magnetic resonance images (MRI) of the penis were taken to produce a series of high contrast coronal and sagittal images both before and during the application of two commercially available clamps, modified for MRI compatibility. Tissue thickness measurements were estimated with the clamps in-situ and normalised to the unloaded baseline state.

Results:

The estimated magnitude of tissue deformations resulting from clamp application ranged between 68% and 84%. There were minimal differences in these deformations between the clamp designs, both of which appeared effective in closing the urethra. Local stress concentrations were observed in the tissues, which were deformed around the shape of the clamp.

Conclusions:

MRI enabled quantification of local tissue deformation during penile clamp application. The results revealed that clamps created large tissue deformations in all three cases, regardless of design. This information could inform the development of new clamp designs and materials to minimise the potential for tissue damage.

Level of evidence:

4

Post-prostatectomy incontinence: multimodal modern-day management

As the rate of prostate cancer detection increases, so does the rate at which radical prostatectomy is performed. Post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) or urine leakage affects around 20% of men who undergo this procedure. Although affected individuals must be supported in maintaining hygiene with the use of urine capture devices, definitive treatment should also be offered if appropriate. A range of management options are available, from incontinence pads to artificial urinary sphincters. However, an understanding of the aetiology of the leak as well as patient factors is vital if the correct treatment option is to be selected. This article describes the potential causes of PPI and explores management options for this condition.

Use of an occlusive penile clamp during filling cystometry in men with symptoms of stress urinary incontinence

OBJECTIVE

In severe post-prostatectomy stress urinary incontinence (SUI), urodynamics may not identify crucial parameters because of inadequate bladder filling. This study evaluated cystometry and pressure flow studies (PFS) in men in whom severe SUI during attempted filling necessitated application of a penile clamp to allow filling to reach cystometric capacity. Men who had undergone prior radical prostatectomy were identified from a database of patients attending for video urodynamic testing between 2012 and 2017. Symptom scores, bladder diary and free flow rate tests were retrieved. Measurements of the subgroup of men for whom a Thomson-Walker compression clamp was used to enable full urodynamic evaluation were evaluated. 166 patients were identified. In 30 patients (18%), severe SUI led to incomplete filling cystometry. Following application of the penile compression clamp, further filling was achieved in each case. Applying the clamp did not alter vesical filling or impede pressure recording. These men had a lower maximum urethral closure pressure (31.6 vs. 46.5 cm H₂ O; P < 0.001), volume at strong desire to void (132 vs. 242 mL; P = 0.003) and cystometric capacity (226 mL with clamp applied vs. 310 mL; P < 0.001) than the overall post-prostatectomy incontinence population. Flow rates during PFS were comparable, but detrusor pressure at maximum flow was lower in the clamp group (11 vs. 22 cm H₂ O; P = 0.009). A penile clamp applied at the time when leakage becomes excessive during filling cystometry avoids premature test termination in men with severe incontinence.

A trial of devices for urinary incontinence after treatment for prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of three continence management devices and absorbent pads used by men with persistent urinary incontinence (>1 year) after treatment for prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Randomised, controlled trial of 56 men with 1-year follow-up. Three devices were tested for 3 weeks each: sheath drainage system, body-worn urinal (BWU) and penile clamp. Device and pad performance were assessed. Quality of life (QoL) was measured at baseline and follow-up with the King's Health Questionnaire. Stated (intended use) and revealed (actual use) preference for products were assessed. Value-for-money was gathered.

RESULTS

Substantial and significant differences in performance were found. The sheath was rated as 'good' for extended use (e.g. golf and travel) when pad changing is difficult; for keeping skin dry, not leaking, not smelling and convenient for storage and travel. The BWU was generally rated worse than the sheath and was mainly used for similar activities but by men who could not use a sheath (e.g. retracted penis) and was not good for seated activities. The clamp was good for short vigorous activities like swimming/exercise; it was the most secure, least likely to leak, most discreet but almost all men described it as uncomfortable or painful. The pads were good for everyday activities and best for night-time use; most easy to use, comfortable when dry but most likely to leak and most uncomfortable when wet. There was a preference for having a mixture of products to meet daytime needs; around two-thirds of men were using a combination of pads and devices after testing compared with baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first trial to systematically compare different continence management devices for men. Pads and devices have different strengths, which make them particularly suited to certain circumstances and activities. Most men prefer to use pads at night but would choose a mixture of pads and devices during the day. Device limitations were important but may be overcome by better design.