SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF MALE INCONTINENCE, WITH PROLENE MESH FIXING WITH PROLENE SUTURES; A PROSPECTIVE NOVEL STUDY FOR THE TREATMENT OF MALE INCONTINENCE AT TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL
AbstractBackground: Urinary incontinence is an uncommon problem in males but has major impact on daily living. This study aimed to highlight the outcome of surgical treatment in terms of safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness in the management of urinary incontinence. Methods: A Total of 48 patients, prospective experimental study, in the duration of 4 years conducted at Department of Urology, Liaquat National Hospital & Medical College. Patients having moderate to severe urinary incontinence for 1 year after transurethral resection of prostate, radical prostatectomy, road traffic accident with pelvic fracture causing neurologic damage were included in this study. Patients having mild incontinence, having multiple co-morbid conditions were excluded from this study. Outcome of surgery was noted during follow up visit after 13 month (median). The data was obtained and analysed by using SPSS version 20. Mean and standard deviation for quantitative data, frequency and percentage for categorical variables were presented. Results: Out of 48 patients having urinary incontinence, 28 (58.3%) had severe urinary incontinence while 20 (41.7%) had moderate incontinence. After surgery, 28 (58.3%) patient had no leakage all day, 12 (25%) had some leakage while bending and 8 (16.7%) had no improvement in symptoms. On ultrasound recorded after voiding in post-surgery patients, 40 (83.3%) had no residual found in bladder while 8(16.7%) could not be assessed due to persistence of urinary incontinence. Conclusion: Our study predicted that in patients having moderate to severe urinary incontinence, Prolene Mesh repair anchoring with Prolene suture can be an efficient and cost-effective treatment for the urinary incontinence with least complications.Keywords: urinary incontinence; Prolene Mesh repair surgery
Higa R, Lopes MHB, D'Ancona CA. Male incontinence: a critical review of the literature. Texto Contexto Enferm 2013;22(1):231–8.
TemmlC, Haidinger G, SchmidbauerJ, Schatzl G, Madersbacher S. Urinary incontinence in both sexes: prevalence rates and impact on quality of life and sexual life. Neurourol Urodyn 2000;19(3):259–71.
Boyle P, Robertson C, Mazzeta C, Keech M, Hobbs FDR, Fourcade R, et al. The prevalence of male urinary incontinence in four centers: the UREPIK study. BJU Int 2003;92(4):409–14.
Robertson C, Link CL, Onel E, Mazzetas C, Keech M, Hobbs R, et al. The impact of lower urinary tract symptons and cormobidities on quality of life: the BACH and UREPIK studies. BJU Int 2007;99(2):347–54.
Nitti VW. The prevalence of urinary incontinence. Rev Urol 2001;3(Suppl 1):S2–6.
Litwin M, Saigal C. Urologic Diseases in America. US Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Serv Natl Inst Health Natl Inst Diabetes Dig Kidney Dis 2012;97–160.
Moore KC, Lucas MG. Management of male urinary incontinence. Indian J Urol 2010;26(2):236–44.
Srulevich M, Chopra A. Urinary incontinence in older men. Clin Geriatr 2007;15(9):38–45.
Trigo-Rocha F, Gomes CM, Pompeo ACL, Lucon AM. Prospective study evaluating efficacy and safety of adjustable continence therapy (ProACT) for radical prostatectomy incontinence. Urology 2006;67(5):965–9.
Moore KN, Gray M. Urinary incontinence in men: current status and future direction. Nurs Res 2004;54(6 Suppl):S36–41.
Ficarra V, Novara G, Galfano A, Stringari C, Baldassarre R, Cavalleri S, et al. Twelve-month self-reported quality of life after retro pubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective study with Rand 36- Item Health Survey (Short Form-36). BJU Int 2006;97(2):274–8.
Grise P, Thurman S. Urinary incontinence following treatment of localized prostate cancer. Cancer Control 2001;8(6):532–9.
Namiki S, Saito S, Satoh M, Ishidoya S, Kawamura S, Tochigi T, et al. Quality of life after radical prostatectomy in japanese men: 2 year longitudinal study. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2005;35(9):551–8.
Ruffion A, Castro-Diaz D, Patel H, Khalaf K, Onyenwenyi A, Globe D, et al. Systematic review of the epidemiology of urinary incontinence and detrusor overactivity among patients with neurogenic overactive bladder. Neuroepidemiology 2013;41(3-4):146–55.
Lucas MG, Bosch RJ, Burkhard FC, Cruz F, Madden TB, Nambiar AK, et al. EAU guidelines on assessment and nonsurgical management of urinary incontinence. Eur Urol 2012;62(6):1130–42.
Sandvik H, Espuna M, Hunskaar S. Validity of incontinence severity index: comparison with pad-weighing tests. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2006;17(5):520–4.
Eustice S, Roe B, Paterson J. Prompted voiding for the management of urinary incontinence in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;2:CD002113.
Roe B, Williams K, Palmer M. Bladder training for urinary incontinence in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;2:CD001308.
Sandhu JS. Treatment options for male stress urinary incontinence. Nat Rev Urol 2010;7(4):222–8.
Welk BK, Herschorn S. Are male slings for post-prostatectomy incontinence a valid option? Curr Opin Urol 2010;20(6):465–70.
Sanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J, Sandler HM, Northouse L, Hembroff L, et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med 2008;358(12):1250–61.
Lucas MG, Bosch RJ, Burkhard FC, Cruz F, Madden TB, Nambiar AK, et al. EAU guidelines on surgical treatment of urinary incontinence. Eur Urol 2012;62(6):1118–29.
Resel-Folkersma L, Salinas-Casado J, Moreno-Sierra J. Post-prostatectomy stress urinary incontinence: a review of contemporary surgical treatments. Rev Clin Gerontol 2014;24(3):191–204.
Migliari R, Pistolesi D, De Angelis M. Polypropilene sling of the bulbar urethra for post-radical prostatectomy incontinence. Eur Urol 2003;43(2):152–7.
Dikranian AH, Chang JH, Rhee EY, Aboseif SR. The male perineal sling: comparison of sling materials. J Urol 2004;172(2):608–10.
Comiter CV. The male sling for stress urinary incontinence: A prospective study. J Urol 2002;167(2):597–601.
Comiter CV. The male perineal sling: intermediateterm results. Neurourol Urodyn 2005;24(7):648–53.
Carmel M, Hage B, Hanna S, Schmutz G, Tu le M. Long-term efficacy of the bone-anchored male sling for moderate and severe stress urinary incontinence. BJU Int 2010;106(7):1012–6.
Romero Maroto J, Prieto Chaparro L, López López C, Quilez Fenoll JM, Bolufer Nadal S. Prolene mesh sling in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Integral treatment of pelvic floor anomalies. Long-term results. Arch Esp Urol 2002;55(9):1057–74.
Kapoor R, Singh KJ, Suri A, Singh P, Mandhani A. Prolene (mesh) bulbourethral sling in male incontinence. Indian J Urol 2007;23(1):29–32.
Winters JC. Male slings in the treatment of sphincteric incompetence. Urol Clin North Am 2011;38(1):73–81.
Fischer MC, Huckabay C, Nitti VW. The male perineal sling: assessment and prediction of outcome. J Urol 2007;177(4):1414–8.
Castle EP, Andrews PE, Itano N, Novicki DE, Swanson SK, Ferrigni RG. The male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence: mean followup of 18 months. J Urol 2005;173(5):1657–60.
Vainrib M, Reyblat P, Ginsberg D. Outcomes of male sling mesh kit placement in patients with neuropathic stress urinary incontinence: a single institution experience. Urol Int 2015;95(4):406–10.
Comiter CV. Surgery Insight: surgical management of postprostatectomy incontinence the artificial urinary sphincter and male sling. Nat Clin Rev Urol 2007;4(11):615–24.