An adjustable continence therapy device for treating incontinence after prostatectomy: a minimum 2-year follow-up

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.

Artificial Urinary Sphincter for Postradical Prostatectomy Urinary Incontinence - Is It the Best Option?

Male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) can undoubtedly reduce quality of life and promote personal distress and psychosocial alienation. The frequency of postprostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) counts on the characterization of urinary incontinence and the periods of patient follow-up. Operational therapeutics, for instance, urethral male slings and artificial urinary sphincters, are well-chosen as adequate and secure surgeries for male SUI in men with continual PPI when conservative treatment is ineffective. Over the former 2 decades, surgery has progressed regarding both operative approach and sling architecture. However, there are no guidelines about when surgery should be carried out and which is the most appropriate surgical option. In this review, we summarize recent advances in implantable devices for PPI and also discuss traditional surgical care. When we are planning the male PPI surgery, careful preoperative work-up should be performed and surgical method should be chosen according to the severity of the disease. Male sling is preferred in mild and moderate symptomatic patients with normal detrusor pressure and it is recommended to select traditional artificial urinary sphincter device in those with severe symptoms. It is expected that effective devices without adverse events will be developed with technical advances in near future.

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.

Outcome and complications of adjustable continence therapy (ProACTTM ) in the treatment of urinary incontinence after transurethral resection of the prostate: A multicenter study

Aim

To evaluate the outcome of adjustable continence balloons in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

Methods

In two tertiary centers, adjustable continence balloons were implanted in 29 patients with post‐TURP SUI between 2007 and 2018. Endpoints of this retrospective multicenter study were patient‐reported changes in pad count and complications. Dry was defined as no pad or one security pad.

Results

Preoperative urinary incontinence was mild in 7 (24%), moderate in 12 (41%), and severe in 10 (35%) patients. The median follow‐up duration was 21 (interquartile range [IQR], 11‐43) months. Within 30 days postoperatively, a Clavien‐Dindo grade less than or equal to II complication occurred in 24% of the patients. Reintervention rate was 24%. Six and 12 months after implantation, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) quality‐of‐life item improved significantly from 5 (IQR, 5‐6) preoperatively to 3 (IQR, 1‐4.5) and 1 (IQR, 0‐3), respectively. At last visit (median 21 months after implantation), the outcome on continence had improved in 76% of the patients, including, 45% dry patients. After a median follow‐up of 28 months (IQR, 13‐63; N = 23), all but one patient reported improvement on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI‐I) scale. In detail, 10 patients reported “very much better” condition compared with before the implantation, 10 patients “much better,” two patients “a little better,” and one patient “no change.” Daily pad use decreased from three (IQR, 2‐5) to one (IQR, 0‐2) pads/day (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

This is hitherto, the first study reporting results of adjustable continence balloons in the treatment of post‐TURP SUI. The therapy was found to be safe and efficient. The majority of our study population reported improvement on their condition and greater than or equal to 50% reduction in daily pad use.

Outcome and complications of adjustable continence therapy (ProACT™) after radical prostatectomy: 10 years' experience in 143 patients

AIMS

To evaluate our outcomes of the adjustable continence balloons ProACT™ for the treatment of male stress urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy.

METHODS

Between May 2007-August 2016 the ProACT™ was implanted in 143 patients without a history of radiotherapy. Endpoints were patient-reported changes in pad counts and complications. Treatment was considered successful if no pad or just one "security" pad per day sufficed, and improved if daily pad use was reduced by ≥50%.

RESULTS

Incontinence before implantation was mild in 36 (25%), moderate in 57 (40%), and severe in 50 (35%) patients. Complications within 30 days were classified by the Clavien-Dindo classification; eight (5.6%) grade I, three (2.1%) grade II, three (2.1%) grade IIIb, and 129 (90.2%) patients had no complication. Revision was done in 43 (30%) patients. The IPSS quality of life item improved significantly from 5.0 (IQR 4.0-5.0) preoperative to 2.0 (IQR 1.0-4.0) and 1.0 (IQR 0.0-3.0) 6 and 12 months after implantation, respectively. After a median follow up of 56 months (range 28 to 79, n = 112), 72 (64%) patients were improved, including 51 (45%) patients were successful. Daily pad use decreased from 3.0 to 1.0 (67% reduction). The median outcome on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale was "much better," and 97 (87%) patients perceived improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

The minimally invasive ProACT™ device showed a clear beneficial continence outcome in patients with stress urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. The majority of the patients were satisfied and perceived improvement ≥50% on daily pad use on the long term.

Contemporary surgical devices for male stress urinary incontinence: a review of technological advances in current continence surgery

Male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) remains a debilitating condition that adversely impacts all domains of quality of life and is associated with significant social stigma and health economic burden. The incidence of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) depends on the definition of urinary incontinence and the length of patient follow up. In patients with persistent PPI following failure of conservative measures, surgical treatment is recommended although there is no published guideline on when surgery should be performed, and what the best surgical option is. Male slings (MS) can be divided into adjustable or non-adjustable types, and offers an attractive option for patients who wish to avoid mechanical handling during urinary voiding. Published intermediate data supports good safety and efficacy rate in men with mild to moderate degree of SUI. The AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) remains the standard of treatment for complete continence and has the longest efficacy and safety records. Other AUS-like devices are designed to address current AMS 800 limitations but themselves are fraught with their own issues.

Surgical treatment for urinary incontinence after prostatectomy: A meta-analysis and systematic review

Background

This meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy of the male sling and artificial urinary sphincter on treating post-prostatectomy incontinence by evaluating daily pad use, cure rate, frequency of improvement in incontinence, and quality of life.

Methods

Medline, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (until March 31, 2014) for studies that investigated the effectiveness of artificial urinary sphincter or sling surgical treatments for prostate cancer. The primary outcome was daily pad use before and after surgery and secondary outcomes were quality of life before and after surgery, and frequency of cures (no need to use of a pad for at least 1 day) and improvements (decreased pad usage) in incontinence after surgery.

Results

We found that that both the sling and artificial urinary sphincter significantly decreased the number of pads used per day by about 3 (P-values <0.001) and increased the quality of life compared with before intervention (P-values < 0.001). In addition, the cure rate and was around 60%. Intervention resulted in improvement in incontinence by about 25% (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that both sling and artificial urinary sphincter interventions are effective in reducing incontinence and improving the patient’s quality of life.

[Urinary incontinence in men]

Stress urinary incontinence in men is predominantly iatrogenic whereby radical prostatectomy is the most common cause with persistent stress urinary incontinence rates varying between 10 % and 25 %. The first line therapy for postoperative male stress urinary incontinence is physiotherapy, especially pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation. If conservative treatment fails to show sufficient improvement, surgical therapy is recommended. Several treatment options are currently available for the surgical treatment of male stress urinary incontinence including artificial sphincters, adjustable and functional sling systems, bulking agents and implantable balloon systems.

[Diagnosis and surgical treatment of postprostatectomy stress incontinence: recommendation of the working group Urologische Funktionsdiagnostik und Urologie der Frau]

Today, for the surgical treatment of postprostatectomy incontinence, several treatment options are available, e.g., adjustable and functional sling systems, artificial sphincter, bulking agents, and balloons. However, no recommendations in terms of specific diagnostic tools and differentiated treatment options for everyday life are available. Our aim is to provide some clinically relevant recommendations for the necessary diagnostic workup and different treatment options of postprostatetectomy incontinence to support clinical decisions in everyday life. Treatment selection should be based on contraindications. However, there is a broad overlap of the various surgical options.

[Therapy of persistent or recurrent stress urinary incontinence]

After synthetic sling procedures, up to 16 % of women and 45.5 % of men complain about a persistent or recurrent stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Currently, randomized studies comparing the different treatment modalities of persistent or recurrent SUI are lacking. There are data of retrospective studies investigating the efficiency of synthetic slings and the artificial urinary sphincter AMS 800® in men. Synthetic slings can be applied in patients with mild SUI and without prior radiation of the pelvic region. The AMS 800® is the treatment of choice in patients with severe SUI or previous radiation.In women with persistent and recurrent SUI, the efficiency of colposuspensions, autologous and synthetic slings as well as the AMS 800® has been investigated in retrospective studies. Due to comparable cure rates and a faster postoperative recovery, synthetic slings are now superseding colposuspensions and autologous slings. Excellent success rates after AMS 800® implantation have been described for both genders; nonetheless, postoperative complications and revisions as well as the requirement of dexterity of the patients should be taken into account. Data about the efficiency of adjustable slings, the ACT® and newer artificial urinary sphincter devices like Flow-Secure® and Zephyr® ZSI 375 in the treatment of persistent and recurrent SUI is lacking.

[Urogynecology II: urinary incontinence in men and women: surgical treatment of urinary incontinence and prolapse]

Numerous surgical procedures are available for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women and men. On a par with classical therapy options (e.g. colposuspension and artificial sphincter prosthesis) suburethral tape procedures have become established as the minimally invasive standard of care. Regarding comorbidities and recurrent urinary incontinence, therapeutic procedures should be modified on an individual basis. It is crucial to involve patients in therapeutic decision-making and counseling should be given with respect to all conservative and operative alternatives.

[Modern operative treatment possibilities in male stress urinary incontinence]

Postprostatectomy incontinence (PPI) is one of the most feared complications of radical prostatectomy with major impact on quality of life and social well-being. In recent years due to improved surgical techniques a reduction of the postoperative incontinence rate was achieved. However, due to the increasing number of radical prostatectomies performed for prostate cancer, a substantial and increasing number of patients are suffering from postoperative stress urinary incontinence. If conservative treatment fails, surgical therapy is recommended. For decades, the artificial urinary sphincter was the reference standard for moderate to severe postoperative male stress urinary incontinence. However, patients' demand on minimally invasive treatment options is high. Age or advanced prostate cancer should not be an exclusion criterion for surgical treatment of persistent PPI.

Simultaneous penile prosthesis and male sling/artificial urinary sphincter

Erectile dysfunction (ED) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) from urethral sphincteric deficiency is not an uncommon problem. The commonest etiology is intervention for localized prostate cancer and/or radical cystoprostatectomy for muscle invasive bladder cancer. Despite advances in surgical technology with robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and nerve sparing techniques, the rates of ED and SUI remain relatively unchanged. They both impact greatly on quality of life domains and have been associated with poor performance outcomes. Both the artificial urinary sphincter and penile prosthesis are gold standard treatments with proven efficacy, satisfaction and durability for end-stage SUI and ED respectively. Simultaneous prosthesis implantation for concurrent conditions has been well described, mostly in small retrospective series. The uptake of combination surgery has been slow due in part to technical demands of the surgery and to an extent, a heightened anxiety over potential complications. This paper aims to discuss the technical aspect of concurrent surgery for both disease entity and the current published outcomes of the various surgical techniques with this approach.