Urinary Incontinence-85: An Expanded Prostate Cancer Composite (EPIC) Score Cutoff Value for Urinary Incontinence Determined Using Long-term Functional Data by Repeated Prospective EPIC-Score Self-assessment After Radical Prostatectomy

Improved early and late continence following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with concurrent bladder neck fascial sling (RoboSling)

Objective

To describe a novel RoboSling technique performed at the time of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and its utility for enhancing urinary function recovery postoperatively.

Materials and Methods

The surgical technique involves harvesting a vascularised, fascial flap from the peritoneum on the posterior aspect of the bladder. Following completion of prostatectomy, the autologous flap is tunnelled underneath the bladder and incorporated into the rectourethralis and vertical longitudinal detrusor fibres at the posterior bladder neck with a modified Rocco suture. After urethra-vesical anastomosis is completed, the corners of the flap are hitched up to Cooper's ligament bilaterally with V-Loc sutures, tensioned and secured creating a bladder neck sling. A prospective, longitudinal cohort study was performed of 193 consecutive patients undergoing RARP between December 2016 and September 2019. The first 163 patients underwent standard RARP, and the last 30 patients had the RoboSling technique performed concurrently. Continence outcomes were the primary outcomes assessed using pad number and Expanded Prostate Cancer Composite (EPIC)-urinary domain questionnaire. Operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), complications and oncological outcomes were secondary outcomes.

Results

The two groups were comparable for demographics and clinicopathological variables. At 3 months, zero pad usage (p = 0.005) and continence rates, defined as EPIC score ≥ 85 (p = 0.007), were both higher in the RoboSling group. EBL, complication rate and positive surgical margin rate did not differ between the two groups. Superior zero pad usage was observed at 1 year in the RoboSling group (p = 0.029). The RoboSling technique added on average 16 min to OT.

Conclusions

The RoboSling procedure at the time of RARP was associated with earlier return to continence without negatively impacting other postoperative outcomes. This improvement in continence outcomes was maintained long term.

A Prospective Analysis of the Effects of Nerve-Sparing Radical Prostatectomy on Urinary Continence Based on Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite and International Index of Erectile Function Scoring Systems

PURPOSE

This study aims to objectively characterize the effect of successful nerve sparing (NS) during radical prostatectomy (RP) on postoperative urinary continence (UC) using International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-scores and a previously described Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) score cutoff value (COV) for UC. Several notable studies on this topic present conflicting outcomes. This is largely due to a lack of clear definitions and consensus regarding preserved erectile function (EF) and UC.

METHODS

This study is comprised of all patients who underwent RP at the Kantonsspital Baden, Switzerland, between 2004 and 2013. Patients completed self-assessment questionnaires for UC (EPIC) and EF (IIEF) pre- and postoperatively (3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months; yearly thereafter). We used a previously described EPIC subscore COV, with "satisfactory continence" signified by a score >85. Statistical analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses for "surgeon-" and "IIEF-defined" NS definitions.

RESULTS

Of 236 men with a median age of 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 59-66 years) and median follow-up time of 48 months (IQR, 30-78 months), 176 underwent unilateral (n=33) or bilateral (n=143) NS RP. Fifty-four underwent non-NS (NNS) RP. Kaplan-Meier analyses identified the following risk factors for UC: age, prostate volume, cancer risk group, and NS status. In surgeon-defined NS RP cases, multivariate analysis for regaining continence demonstrated no significant difference (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-1.25; P=0.3). With successful IIEF-defined NS RPs, regression analysis demonstrated no significant difference (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.59-1.35; P=0.58).

Conclusions

In our population, analysis and comparison of surgeon- and IIEF-defined NS and NNS cohorts revealed that NS RP did not improve postoperative UC. The conservation of UC alone should not motivate surgeons or patients to pursue NS RP.