Comparison between reduction in 24‐hour pad weight, International Consultation on Incontinence‐Short Form (ICIQ‐SF) score, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and Post‐Operative Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI‐I) score in patient evaluation after male perineal sling

Twiss, Christian O.; Fischer, M; Νitti, Victor W.

doi:10.1002/nau.20333

Cited by 55 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In August 2015, a standardized questionnaire was sent to all participants. Hereby, the following validated tools were assessed: International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form (ICIQ-SF) [16], International Quality of Life (IQoL) score [17], and patient’s global impression of improvement (PGI) [18], and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for the inguinal as well as perineal region. Additionally, the questionnaire included detailed instructions for a 24-hour pad test and enough pads for more than 24 hours.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term Outcome of the Retrourethral Transobturator Male Sling After Transurethral Resection of the Prostate

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo evaluate long-term outcomes of AdVance and AdVanceXP male slings in patients with persistent stress urinary incontinence (SUI) after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).MethodsA total of 18 consecutive patients received AdVance (n=14) or AdVanceXP (n=4) male sling implantation between 2007 and 2013. Continence was determined by pad use, 24-hour pad testing and validated questionnaires (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire Short Form, ICIQ-SF). Quality of life was evaluated by International Quality of Life (IQoL) score. Patient satisfaction was measured with patient’s global impression of improvement score. Cure was defined as 0–5 g in the 24-hour pad test. Statistical analysis included Fisher exact and Wilcoxon test (P<0.05).ResultsFollow-up was available for 15 patients who underwent further analysis. After a median follow-up of 70 months (range, 18–83 months), mean daily pad usage was 1.8±2.1 pads (P=0.015 vs. baseline level). Mean IQoL score was 66.4±31.6 (P=0.050 vs. baseline level), and mean ICIQ-SF score was 9.5±6.6 (P=0.077 vs. baseline level). Based on 24-hour pad testing, mean daily urine loss was 31.2±64.5 g (median, 0 g; range, 0–209 g). Cure rate was 46.7%, and cure-and-improved rate was 60.0%. Assessing predictive features for success, better results were found in patients who needed up to 4 pads preoperatively (P=0.041) as well as for patients ≤71 years at the time of implantation (P=0.041).ConclusionsThe findings indicate that AdVance and AdVanceXP implantation can be performed effectively and safely in men suffering from SUI after TURP. However, long-term success rates seem to be lower compared to SUI after radical prostatectomy and patients should be counseled accordingly.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term Outcome of the Retrourethral Transobturator Male Sling After Transurethral Resection of the Prostate

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A standardized questionnaire was sent to all participants and, additionally, a telephone survey was performed. The following validated tools were used: the International Consultation on Incontinence questionnaire (ICIQ) [8], International Quality of Life (IQOL) score [9], and the Patient's Global Impression of Improvement (PGI) score [10]. Patients were sent 1 pad as well as detailed information sheet and were advised to perform a home 24-h pad test accordingly.…”

Section: Surgical Technique Study Design and Data Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mid‐term outcomes after AdVanceXP male sling implantation

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo describe efficacy and safety of the AdVanceXP (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) retrourethral transobturator male sling after a mean follow‐up of almost 3 years.Patients and MethodsA total of 41 patients underwent AdVanceXP implantation between July 2010 and March 2012 by a single surgeon. Patients were prospectively evaluated at baseline, after a mean follow‐up of 12months and after an individual maximum follow‐up. Efficacy was evaluated by daily pad usage, 24‐h pad testing, and validated questionnaires (International Consultation on Incontinence questionnaire [ICIQ]). Patient satisfaction was determined using the Patient's Global Impression of Improvement score; quality of life was evaluated using the International Quality of Life (IQOL) score. Patients needing 0 or 1 safety pad with a daily urine loss <8 g were classified as cured. To assess the changes in outcome over time, a Wilcoxon signed‐rank test was used. A P value <0.05 was taken to indicate statistical significance.ResultsThe mean ± sd follow‐up was 33.1 ± 8.1 months. A total of four patients (9.8%) were lost to follow‐up. At follow‐up, 56.1% of patients used 0 or 1 dry safety pad, 17.1% used 1 pad, and 17.1% used 2 pads. Mean pad use was 0.6 pads per day (P < 0.001 vs baseline) with a mean urine loss of 14 g per day. After nearly 3 years, 46.3% of the patients could be classified as cured and 29.3% could be classified as improved. When comparing respective outcomes after 1 and 3 years, no significant changes in mean daily pad use (0.8 at 1 year; P = 1.000), in ICIQ score (5.0 at 3 years vs 5.2 at 1 year; P = 0.500), or in IQOL score (89.2 at 3 years vs 86.8 at 1 year; P = 0.500) were observed. Patients lost less urine based on 24‐h pad testing after nearly 3 years (14 g at 3 years vs 28 g at 1 year; P = 0.106). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in efficacy in patients who had previously received radiotherapy or in patients with mild preoperative incontinence. Between 1 and 3 years postoperatively, no complications were detected.ConclusionsThe present study had the longest follow‐up for AdVanceXP to date and is the first to show a high efficacy even after a mean follow‐up of almost 3 years. The results indicate that late‐onset complications are rare after AdVanceXP implantation.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, standardised and validated questionnaires were prospectively utilized for the evaluation of quality of life (QoL) and satisfaction rate. The following questionnaires were used: "incontinence -QoL" [8] (I-QoL; scale: 0-100, higher score presents better QoL), "Patient Global Impression of Improvement" (PGI-I) [9] (range 1-7, very much better to very much worse), "international consultation on incontinence questionnaire-short form" (ICIQ-SF) [10,11] (range 0-21, 0 = no incontinence, 1-5 = slight, 6-12 = moderate, 13-18 = severe, 19-21 = very severe), "Verbale Rating Scale of Pain" (range 0-10, minimal to maximum pain) for perineum, genitals, inguinal groin and symphysis. The preoperative evaluation included detailed incontinence history, sonography, cystoscopy, and urodynamics if needed.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The TiLOOP® Male Sling: Did We Forejudge

Hüsch

Kretschmer²,

Thomsen³

et al. 2017

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TiLOOP® male sling (pfm medical, Cologne, Germany) used in the treatment for male stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Material and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated a total of 34 patients with a TiLOOP® male sling. Perioperative complication rates were assessed and validated questionnaires were prospectively evaluated to assess quality of life and satisfaction rate. Outcome and complication rates were analysed by using descriptive statistics. Correlation of continence outcome and risk factors was performed with the chi-square test. A p value below 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The majority of patients (70.6%) were diagnosed with mild or moderate male SUI. During surgery, one instance (2.9%) of intraoperative urethral injury was observed. There were no immediate postoperative complications. The mean follow-up time was 44.6 months. An improvement of male SUI was reported by 61.9% of the patients and 38.1% reported no change according the Patient Global Impression of Improvement. The mean perineal pain score was 0.5 according to the international index of pain. Conclusions: The TiLOOP® is a safe treatment option for male SUI in our cohort with a low complication rate. However, the functional outcome of the TiLOOP® was inferior when compared to the outcome of the AdVance® male sling.

show abstract

Comparison between reduction in 24‐hour pad weight, International Consultation on Incontinence‐Short Form (ICIQ‐SF) score, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and Post‐Operative Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI‐I) score in patient evaluation after male perineal sling

Cited by 55 publications

References 24 publications

Long-term Outcome of the Retrourethral Transobturator Male Sling After Transurethral Resection of the Prostate

Long-term Outcome of the Retrourethral Transobturator Male Sling After Transurethral Resection of the Prostate

Mid‐term outcomes after AdVanceXP male sling implantation

The TiLOOP® Male Sling: Did We Forejudge

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About