Review – IncontinenceContemporary Management of Postprostatectomy Incontinence
Introduction
The reported prevalence of urinary incontinence in all men is as high as 39% and increases with age [1]. The most prevalent cause of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in adult men is the radical prostatectomy (RP), a standard treatment for localised prostate cancer (PCa) [2]. Postoperative incontinence is one of the most feared complications of RP with a major impact on quality of life. Due to the increasing number of RPs performed for PCa, a substantial and increasing number of patients suffer from postoperative stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Despite improved surgical techniques, the reported SUI rates are between 5% and 48.0% [1]. In addition, especially during the first year after RP, overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms due to detrusor overactivity (up to 77% of patients) and de novo impaired bladder compliance (up to 50% of patients) may occur [3]. However, in most cases OAB symptoms are self-limiting after a year [3], [4], [5]. This large variation in the rates of reported incontinence after RP may be attributed, to a certain extent, on the influence of the interviewing physician as well as the lack of a standardised definition of both “postprostatectomy incontinence” and “postprostatectomy continence” [1], [6]. Postprostatectomy continence rates seem to depend on several factors including the methodology of definition (eg, definition of continence: no leakage at all, no pads but loss of a few drops of urine, one safety pad per day; use of questionnaires), patient factors (eg, age, body mass index, urethral length, possibly prostate volume, preoperative continence status, preoperative sphincter insufficiency, preoperative detrusor dysfunction), and surgical technique (eg, the experience of the surgeon, the surgical approach, and the technique of resection) [7]. In general, men <50 yr of age show a significantly better continence rate than men >70 yr after RP [8]. The treatment of postprostatectomy incontinence consists of three different approaches: conservative management, pharmacotherapy, and surgical treatment.
Overall, postprostatectomy incontinence has a major impact on quality of life affecting the patient's physical activity and social well-being and subsequently imposing a major burden for patients that needs to be addressed [9]. This paper reviews all of the currently available evidence in the field of management of postprostatectomy incontinence and makes recommendations for the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of this problem.
Section snippets
Evidence acquisition
In August 2010, we conducted a review of the literature using the Medline database. All articles concerning noninvasive and invasive treatment for postprostatectomy incontinence were included. Meeting reports were not included. In addition, other significant studies cited in the reference list of the selected articles and other significant studies published after the systematic review were evaluated. Multiple free-text searches were performed including the following terms: postprostatectomy
Diagnosis
Evidence for an appropriate, meaningful, and validated tool for the measurement of postprostatectomy incontinence is lacking. According to the European Association of Urology (EAU), the diagnosis of male urinary incontinence requires a two-step assessment (Fig. 1) [1]. The first step of the evaluation should include a medical history, an objective assessment of symptoms, and a physical examination including urine analysis and ultrasound for residual urine (postvoid residual). In addition, the
Conclusions
RP is the main causative factor for male SUI. However, there has been no standardised definition for postprostatectomy SUI incontinence. The evaluation and diagnosis of this problem should be performed according to the two-stage assessment recommended by the EAU guidelines. Validated questionnaires should be used to assess symptoms and impact of quality of life. Before surgical treatment, we recommend specialised clinical assessment including urethrocystoscopy and urodynamics.
Guideline
References (101)
- et al.
Voiding dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy: more than external urethral sphincter deficiency
Eur Urol
(2007) - et al.
Urodynamic evaluation of changes in urinary control after radical retropubic prostatectomy
J Urol
(1997) - et al.
Post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a confluence of 3 factors
J Urol
(2010) - et al.
Potency, continence and complications in 3,477 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies
J Urol
(2004) - et al.
Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence
Am J Obstet Gynecol
(2003) - et al.
The standardisation of terminology in lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the International Continence Society
Urology
(2003) - et al.
Sex differences in the determination of abdominal leak point pressure in patients with intrinsic sphincter deficiency
J Urol
(1996) - et al.
Preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise for early continence after radical prostatectomy: a randomised controlled study
Eur Urol
(2010) - et al.
Effectiveness of early pelvic floor rehabilitation treatment for post-prostatectomy incontinence
Eur Urol
(2005) - et al.
Long-term effect of early postoperative pelvic floor biofeedback on continence in men undergoing radical prostatectomy: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial
J Urol
(2010)