Slings in iatrogenic male incontinence: Current status

Advances in stem cell therapy for male stress urinary incontinence

INTRODUCTION

Among the several options that have been proposed in recent years for the management of male stress urinary incontinence (SUI), stem cell therapy represents a new frontier in treatment. The aim of this paper is to update the current status of stem cell therapy in animal and human studies for the management of iatrogenic male SUI.

AREAS COVERED

A literature review was conducted based on MEDLINE/PubMed searches for English articles using a combination of the following keywords: stem cell therapy, urinary incontinence, prostatectomy, regenerative medicine, mesenchymal stem cells.

EXPERT OPINION

The few studies reported in the literature have demonstrated short-term safety and promising results of stem cell therapy in treating male SUI. However, many aspects need to be clarified before stem cell therapy can be introduced into daily urologic practice. In fact, important issues such as the limitations of these studies in terms of small sample sizes and short follow-ups, the incomplete knowledge of the mechanism of action of stem cells, the technical details regarding the delivery method and the best sources of stem cells, the safety risks regarding genomic or epigenetic changes and potential immune reactions in the longer term need to be identified in more stringent clinical trials.

Evaluation of urodynamic parameters after sling surgery in men with post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence

Objective:

To evaluate urodynamic alterations after sub-urethral sling surgery (SSU) in patients with post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPUI).

Materials and Methods:

We evaluated data of 22 patients submitted to radical prosta- tectomy (RP) or transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) that presented post-surgical urinary incontinence and were treated with SSU implant in a pilot study previously performed in our institution.

Methods:

Those patients with PPUI were evaluated by urodynamic exam (UD) before and after surgery, and the parameters were compared, including uroflow, cystometry and micturition study. Exclusion criteria included patients without pre-operatory urodynamic study, those with urethral stenosis, those not healed of prostate cancer, pa- tients without clinical conditions to be submitted to urodynamic study and those with severe neurological diseases or that refused to sign the consent form. Results were analyzed statistically by Fisher, Wilcoxon or Mann-Whitney tests.

Results:

During free uroflow, none parameters showed any statistical significant differ- ences. During cystometry, there were also no statistical differences and the same was observed at pressure versus flow study; the exception was at maximal flow detrusor pressure (PdetQmax), that was lower at post-operatory (p=0.028). In relation to the presence of urinary dysfunctions associated to PPUI, we observed a significant reduc- tion of detrusor overactivity (p=0.035) in relation to pre-operatory period.

Conclusion:

SSU surgery significantly reduced detrusor overactivity and PdetQMax; however, there were no alterations of other evaluated urodynamic parameters.

Simple vs six-branches autologous suburethral sling during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to improve early urinary continence recovery: prospective randomized study

We have recently described the use of a retropubic suburethral autologous sling created and placed during robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP). In this study, we assess the effectiveness of newly designed six-branches compared to two-branches suburethral autologous sling in improving early urinary continence (UC) recovery. 120 patients submitted to RARP were prospectively randomized according to the intraoperative positioning of six-branches (group 1, n = 60) or two-branches autologous sling (group 2, n = 60) obtained by different configuration of a same tract of vas deferens removed. Early UC recovery was assessed at 5 (catheter removal), 10 and 30 days postoperatively through the daily number of pads used and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence-Short Form (ICIQ-UI-SF) score. UC was defined as the non-use of pad. Chi square test and Wilcoxon test were used to investigate UC recovery between the two groups. Moreover, post-voiding residual was evaluated in each patient at the same time. At catheter removal, UC rate was in groups 1 and 2, 60 and 35% (p = 0.02); at 10 days 70 and 46% (p = 0.03); at 30 days 87 and 70% (p = 0.04), respectively. One patient in group 1 experienced acute urinary retention at the time of catheter removal and was treated uneventfully with a further 7-day catheterization. These preliminary data indicate that newly designed six-branches suburethral autologous sling is able to increase the rate of early UC recovery compared to the two-arms sling previously described by us.

Stem Cell Therapy for Male Urinary Incontinence

INTRODUCTION

Among the medical and surgical options which have been proposed in the last years for the management of male stress urinary incontinence (SUI), stem cell therapy represents a new frontier treatment. The aim of this paper is to update the current status of stem cell therapy in animal and human studies for the management of iatrogenic male SUI.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A PubMed review of the literature on stem cell therapy for the treatment of male SUI was performed.

RESULTS

Regarding animal studies, bone marrow-, muscle- and adipose-derived stem cells have been widely studied, showing regeneration of the urethral sphincter and recovery of the damaged pelvic nerves. With regard to human studies, only four papers are available in the literature using muscle- and adipose-derived stem cells which reported a significant improvement in sphincteric function and incontinence with no severe side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of these promising results, further studies are needed with longer follow-ups and larger numbers of patients in order to clarify the potential role of stem cell therapy for the treatment of male SUI.

Potential risk factors and outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter placement after radical cystectomy and orthotopic neobladder urinary diversion

AIMS

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a known possibility after radical cystectomy (RC) and orthotopic neobladder (ONB) urinary diversion. We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes and complications of patients who underwent artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) placement for treatment of SUI and evaluated potential risk factors (PRFs) for AUS failure.

METHODS

Patients who underwent AUS placement after RC/ONB from 1994 to 2009 were identified. Variables evaluated included: demographics, cancer type, AUS characteristics, urinary incontinence (UI), revision procedures data, and PRFs for AUS failure.

RESULTS

Demographic data was reviewed on 36 patients. Mean age at AUS placement was 72 (58-79) years. Mean time to AUS after RC/ONB was 28 (2-120) months. Mean follow up after AUS was 40 (2-132) months. TCC was the indication for RC in 94% of patients. The most commonly placed AUS cuff and reservoir size was 4.5 cm and 61-70 H2 O, respectively. Incontinence data was available in 29 patients. Pre-AUS placement 22, 3, and 4 patients were totally, daytime and nighttime only incontinent, respectively. Post-AUS placement, incontinence persisted in 5, 1, and 2 patients with total, daytime and nighttime incontinence, respectively. Prior to AUS placement 11/36 patients received chemotherapy and 10/36 had radiation. Mean time to the first revision/explantation due to UI/erosion/infection/malfunction was an average of 28 (3-96) months after AUS placement and occurred in 21/35 (60%) patients. There was no significant correlation noted between PRFs and UI pre-/post-AUS or between PRFs and the need for AUS revision.

CONCLUSIONS

AUS is a safe, effective treatment with an acceptable complication rate for patients after RC/ONB with SUI.