Comparison of standardized pre- and postoperative functional pelvic cine-MRI in patients with a bulbourethral composite suspension due to post-prostatectomy incontinence
- 156 Downloads
- 2 Citations
Abstract
Objectives
To compare functional pelvic cine-MRI in patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence before and after implantation of a bulbourethral composite suspension.
Patients and methods
Functional pelvic 1.5 T cine-MRI was performed at rest, under standardized Valsalva pressure and during micturition in six patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence before and 3 months after a bulbourethral composite suspension. Visibility and positioning of the implant as well as membranous urethral length (MUL) and positioning of the bladder neck (BN) in comparison with the pubococcygeal line (PCL) were evaluated. Clinical outcome was measured by patient-reported pad use and standardized questionnaires (ICIQ-UI SF and I-QOL). Paired data were tested with a Wilcoxon signed-ranks test.
Results
Surgery was successfully performed in all patients. All patients returned to complete voiding. The ICIQ-UI SF score decreased significantly from median 16.5 to 5 (p = 0.016). I-QOL increased significantly from 70.5 to 93.5 (p = 0.047). Pad use improved from median 2 pads to 0 pads postoperatively (p = 0.031). Four of six patients were completely pad-free, and 2 were failures with persisting urinary incontinence. MRI revealed significant differences of the MUL at rest with median of 8 mm pre- and 13 mm postoperatively (p = 0.016). BN showed a significant elevation with respect to PCL under Valsalva with in median 0.5 to 5 mm postoperatively (p = 0.016). No significant MRI differences were found between patients showing clinical success or failure.
Conclusions
The bulbourethral composite suspension was associated with an increase in urethral length, urethral coaptation zone and bladder neck elevation, implying a non-compressive mode of action.
Keywords
Post-prostatectomy incontinence MRI Bulbourethral urethra suspension Male slingsNotes
Acknowledgments
We thank Philips Healthcare for their technical support in the realization of this project.
Conflict of interest
The authors guarantee that there are no conflicts of interest and no financial support from any company.
References
- 1.Herschorn S (2008) The artificial urinary sphincter is the treatment of choice for post-radical prostatectomy incontinence. Can Urol Assoc J Journal de l’Association des urologues du Canada. 2(5):536–539Google Scholar
- 2.Gallo F, Schenone M, Giberti C (2010) Slings in iatrogenic male incontinence: current status. Indian J Urol IJU J Urol Soc India 26(2):279–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Welk BK, Herschorn S (2010) Are male slings for post-prostatectomy incontinence a valid option? Curr Opin Urol 20(6):465–470PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.John H (2004) Bulbourethral composite suspension: a new operative technique for post-prostatectomy incontinence. J Urol 171(5):1866–1870; discussion 9–70Google Scholar
- 5.John H, Blick N (2008) Mid-term outcome after bulbourethral composite suspension for postprostatectomy incontinence. Urology 71(6):1191–1195PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Horstmann M, Fischer I, Vollmer C, Horton K, Kurz M, Padevit C, John H (2012) Pre- and postoperative urodynamic findings in patients after a bulbourethral composite suspension with intraoperative urodynamically controlled sling tension adjustment for postprostatectomy incontinence. Urology 79(3):702–707PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Horstmann M, Padevit C, Schwab C, Horton K, John H (2011) V371 Intraoperative urodynamic considerations in bulborurethral sling surgery for post prostatectomy incontinence. The Journal of Urology. 185(4, Supplement 1):e151Google Scholar
- 8.Bauer RM, Herrmann K, Karl A, Stief CG, Hocaoglu Y (2011) Real-time MRI of continent and stress incontinent male patients after orthotopic ileal neobladder. Urol Int 87(3):325–329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Hocaoglu Y, Roosen A, Herrmann K, Tritschler S, Stief C, Bauer RM (2012) Real-time magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): anatomical changes during physiological voiding in men. BJU Int 109(2):234–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Soljanik I, Bauer RM, Becker AJ, Stief CG, Gozzi C, Soljanik O, Kirchhoff SM (2013) Morphology and dynamics of the male pelvic floor before and after retrourethral transobturator sling placement: first insight using MRI. World J Urol 31(3):629–638. doi: 10.1007/s00345-012-0884-3
- 11.Papin G, Tissot V, Le Penndu H, Nonent M, Fournier G (2012) Assessment of the transobturator male sling by a pelvic MRI. Progres en urologie : journal de l’Association francaise d’urologie et de la Societe francaise d’urologie. 22(10):602–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Avery K, Donovan J, Peters TJ, Shaw C, Gotoh M, Abrams P (2004) ICIQ: a brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 23(4):322–330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Ross S, Soroka D, Karahalios A, Glazener CM, Hay-Smith EJ, Drutz HP (2006) Incontinence-specific quality of life measures used in trials of treatments for female urinary incontinence: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 17(3):272–285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Davies TO, Bepple JL, McCammon KA (2009) Urodynamic changes and initial results of the AdVance male sling. Urology 74(2):354–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Paparel P, Akin O, Sandhu JS, Otero JR, Serio AM, Scardino PT, Hricak H, Guillonneau B (2009) Recovery of urinary continence after radical prostatectomy: association with urethral length and urethral fibrosis measured by preoperative and postoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Urol 55(3):629–637PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar