Efficacy and safety of adjustable balloons (Proact™) to treat male stress urinary incontinence after prostate surgery: Medium and long‐term follow‐up data of a national multicentric retrospective study

Adjustable continence therapy (proACT) for the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence post-prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2023 update)

PURPOSE

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a key factor for post-prostatectomy (RP) quality of life. Current international guidelines struggle to find the adequate place for each kind of surgeries. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis considering updated evidence is to assess the efficacy and safety of proACT in treating male patients with post-RP SUI.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed by searching the PubMed database. We narrowed included studies with adult male patients with SUI; outcomes included pads or pad weight per day and quality of life (QOL) questionnaires, as well as safety outcomes.

RESULTS

18 studies involving 1570 patients mean age of 68.8 (EC 2.1) were included. The mean follow-up reported was 34.7 months (EC 17.7; median 38.5; range 1-128 months). An average of 60.7% (EC 27) and 40.4% of patients suffered from mild-to-moderate and severe incontinence, respectively. The overall dryness rate was 55.1% (EC 19.3) while respecting the definition of 0-1 pads per day, and the mean dryness rate was 53% (EC 0.2). The mean overall complication rate was 31.2% (EC 18.3%), including an explantation rate of 26.5% (EC 15.3) and a reoperation rate of 22.7% (EC 8.7). The methodological quality of the 18 studies was very heterogeneous.

CONCLUSION

Implantation of proACT adjustable balloons is a minimally invasive technique that provides medium outcomes (53%) with a strict definition of dryness (0-1 PPD) and important complication rate (31.2%). Past of irradiation is a negative predictive factor for incontinence.

Adjustable continence balloons in postprostatectomy incontinence: Outcomes and complications

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the mid-term efficacy and safety of adjustable continence therapy (ProACT™) for the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after radical prostatectomy (RP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Single-center retrospective study including male patients implanted with ProACT™ periurethral balloons for SUI after RP between 2007 and 2017, mainly with flexible cystoscopic guidance. Efficacy was assessed using a composite endpoint with subjective (patient's impression of improvement (PII), using a 0-100 numeral rating scale) and objective outcomes (decrease in daily pad use). Postoperative success was defined as a PII ≥ 80%, associated with the use of 0-1 pad daily. Improvement was defined as a PII ≥ 50% and a decrease ≥50% in the number of daily pads used.

RESULTS

Two hundred men with a median age of 68 (64-73) years were included. Seventeen percent (n = 34) had had prior radiotherapy and 15.5% (n = 31) had had prior SUI surgery. The median follow-up was 43 (19-71) months. The severity of SUI was as follows: mild in 119 (59.5%), moderate in 48 (24%), and severe in 33 patients (16.5%). Severe SUI and a history of prior radiotherapy were associated with a lower success rate (p = 0.033 and p < 0.0001). The overall reoperation rate was 34%, with 5.6% (n = 11) requiring a third implantation. Of the patients, 29.4% (n = 58) required an artificial urinary sphincter to treat SUI. At the last follow up, among the overall population, the success rate was 40.1% and the median PII was 18.3%. For patients in whom the balloons were still in place (n = 132), the cumulative success and improvement rate was 78%, with a median PII of 72%.

CONCLUSION

The minimally invasive ProACT™ device provides a clear beneficial continence outcome in patients with SUI after radical prostatectomy. Severe SUI or prior radiotherapy were associated with a lower success rate in our study.

Evaluation and treatment of urinary incontinence in the aging male

Risk of urinary incontinence (UI) increases with age and can have detrimental effects on patients and caregivers. UI should not be considered a normal part of aging and warrants a comprehensive evaluation. Treatment of UI in the aging male requires special consideration, particularly when it comes to comorbid conditions and potential side effects of intervention. The aim of this review is to discuss the evaluation of, risk factors for, and management of UI in the aging male.

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing Adjustable Transobturator Male System (ATOMS) and Adjustable Continence Therapy (ProACT) for male stress incontinence

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Urinary incontinence is one of the most serious complications of prostate cancer treatment. The objective of this study was to assess efficacy and safety of Adjustable Transobturator Male System (ATOMS) compared to Adjustable Continence Therapy (proACT) for male stress urinary incotinence according to literature findings.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis on adjustable devices ATOMS and ProACT is presented. Studies on female or neurogenic incontinence were excluded. Differences between ATOMS and proACT in primary objective: dryness status (no-pad or one safety pad/day) after initial device adjustment, and in secondary objectives: improvement, satisfaction, complications and device durability, were estimated using random-effect model. Statistical heterogeneity among studies included in the meta-analysis was assessed using tau2, Higgins´s I2 statistics and Cochran´s Q test.

RESULTS

Combined data of 41 observational studies with 3059 patients showed higher dryness (68 vs. 55%; p = .01) and improvement (91 vs. 80%; p = .007) rate for ATOMS than ProACT. Mean pad-count (-4 vs. -2.5 pads/day; p = .005) and pad-test decrease (-425.7 vs. -211.4 cc; p < .0001) were also significantly lower. Satisfaction was higher for ATOMS (87 vs. 56%; p = .002) and explant rate was higher for proACT (5 vs. 24%; p < .0001). Complication rate for ProACT was also higher, but not statistically significant (17 vs. 26%; p = .07). Mean follow-up was 25.7 months, lower for ATOMS than ProACT (20.8 vs. 30.6 months; p = .02). The rate of working devices favoured ATOMS at 1-year (92 vs. 76; p < .0001), 2-years (85 vs. 61%; p = .0008) and 3-years (81 vs. 58%; p = .0001). Significant heterogeneity was evidenced, due to variable incontinence severity baseline, difficulties for a common reporting of complications, different number of adjustments and time of follow-up and absence of randomized studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limitations that studies available are exclusively descriptive and the follow-up is limited, literature findings confirm ATOMS is more efficacious, with higher patient satisfaction and better durability than ProACT to treat male stress incontinence.