Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The preoperative pad test as a predictor of urinary incontinence and quality of life after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective, observational, clinical study

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To assess whether the preoperative 1-h pad test could predict postoperative urinary incontinence and quality of life after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Methods

A total of 329 patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy between 2013 and 2016 were prospectively enrolled in this study. These patients were divided into the preoperative urinary continence group and the preoperative urinary incontinence group according to the 1-h pad test. The time to achieve urinary continence, lower urinary tract function evaluated by uroflowmetry and post-voided residual urine volume, and quality of life evaluated by King’s Health Questionnaire and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form were compared between these two groups.

Results

There were 190 patients (58%) in the preoperative urinary continence group (1-h pad test ≤ 2 g) and 139 patients (42%) in the preoperative urinary incontinence group (1-h pad test > 2 g). In the preoperative urinary continence/incontinence groups, 83%/76% of patients achieved continence within 12 months, respectively, and urinary incontinence remained significantly longer in the preoperative incontinence group than in the preoperative continence group (P  = 0.042). Although there were no significant differences in all quality of life items between the two groups before surgery, several items were significantly higher in the preoperative urinary continence group.

Conclusion

Achievement of urinary continence and improvement of urinary quality of life are delayed in patients with preoperative urinary incontinence assessed by the 1-h pad test. The preoperative 1-h pad test could be a useful predictor of prolonged urinary incontinence and poor quality of life after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Patel VR, Sivaraman A, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Orvieto MA, Camacho I, Coughlin G, Rocco B (2011) Pentafecta: a new concept for reporting outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 59(5):702–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.01.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jereczek-Fossa BA, Zerini D, Fodor C, Santoro L, Maucieri A, Gerardi MA, Vischioni B, Cambria R, Garibaldi C, Cattani F, Vavassori A, Matei DV, Musi G, De Cobelli O, Orecchia R (2014) Reporting combined outcomes with Trifecta and survival, continence, and potency (SCP) classification in 337 patients with prostate cancer treated with image-guided hypofractionated radiotherapy. BJU Int 114(6b):E3–E10. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12530

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Van Kampen M, Geraerts I, De Weerdt W, Van Poppel H (2009) An easy prediction of urinary incontinence duration after retropubic radical prostatectomy based on urine loss the first day after catheter withdrawal. J Urol 181(6):2641–2646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.02.025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Murphy G, Haddock P, Doak H, Jackson M, Dorin R, Meraney A, Kesler S, Staff I, Wagner JR (2015) Urinary bother as a predictor of postsurgical changes in urinary function after robotic radical prostatectomy. Urology 86(4):817–823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.04.041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Nguyen L, Jhaveri J, Tewari A (2008) Surgical technique to overcome anatomical shortcoming: balancing post-prostatectomy continence outcomes of urethral sphincter lengths on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 179(5):1907–1911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.036

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tan HJ, Xiong S, Laviana AA, Chuang RJ, Treat E, Walsh PC, Hu JC (2016) Technique and outcomes of bladder neck intussusception during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: A parallel comparative trial. Urol Oncol 34(12):529.e521–529.e527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.01.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. You YC, Kim TH, Sung GT (2012) Effect of bladder neck preservation and posterior urethral reconstruction during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for urinary continence. Korean J Urol 53(1):29–33. https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2012.53.1.29

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Lavigueur-Blouin H, Noriega AC, Valdivieso R, Hueber PA, Bienz M, Alhathal N, Latour M, Trinh QD, El-Hakim A, Zorn KC (2015) Predictors of early continence following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Can Urol Assoc J 9(1–2):e93–97. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2086

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Kim JJ, Ha YS, Kim JH, Jeon SS, Lee DH, Kim WJ, Kim IY (2012) Independent predictors of recovery of continence 3 months after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 26(10):1290–1295. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2012.0117

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Bahler CD, Sundaram CP, Kella N, Lucas SM, Boger MA, Gardner TA, Koch MO (2016) A parallel randomized clinical trial examining the return of urinary continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with or without a small intestinal submucosa bladder neck sling. J Urol 196(1):179–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.01.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kumar A, Samavedi S, Bates AS, Coelho RF, Rocco B, Palmer K, Patel VR (2015) Continence outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with adverse urinary continence risk factors. BJU Int 116(5):764–770. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Van Velthoven RF, Ahlering TE, Peltier A, Skarecky DW, Clayman RV (2003) Technique for laparoscopic running urethrovesical anastomosis:the single knot method. Urology 61(4):699–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(02)02543-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rocco F, Carmignani L, Acquati P, Gadda F, Dell’Orto P, Rocco B, Bozzini G, Gazzano G, Morabito A (2006) Restoration of posterior aspect of rhabdosphincter shortens continence time after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 175(6):2201–2206. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(06)00262-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Sullivan R, Karantanis E, Stevermuer TL, Allen W, Moore KH (2004) Definition of mild, moderate and severe incontinence on the 24-hour pad test. BJOG 111(8):859–862. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00211.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Haga N, Aikawa K, Hoshi S, Yabe M, Akaihata H, Hata J, Satoh Y, Ogawa S, Ishibashi K, Kojima Y (2016) Postoperative urinary incontinence exacerbates nocturia-specific quality of life after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol 23(10):873–878. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Haga N, Hata J, Matsuoka K, Koguchi T, Akaihata H, Kataoka M, Sato Y, Ogawa S, Ishibashi K, Kojima Y (2018) The impact of nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy on lower urinary tract function: prospective assessment of patient-reported outcomes and frequency volume charts. Neurourol Urodyn 37(1):322–330. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23297

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kaiho Y, Masuda H, Takei M, Hirayama T, Mitsui T, Yokoyama M, Kitta T, Kawamorita N, Nakagawa H, Iwamura M, Arai Y (2018) Surgical and patient reported outcomes of artificial urinary sphincter implantation: a multicenter, prospective, observational study. J Urol 199(1):245–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wei JT, Dunn RL, Marcovich R, Montie JE, Sanda MG (2000) Prospective assessment of patient reported urinary continence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 164(3 Pt 1):744–748

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Moore K, Allen M, Voaklander DC (2004) Pad tests and self-reports of continence in men awaiting radical prostatectomy: establishing baseline norms for males. Neurourol Urodyn 23(7):623–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20067

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kadono Y, Nohara T, Kadomoto S, Nakashima K, Iijima M, Shigehara K, Narimoto K, Izumi K, Mizokami A (2016) Investigating urinary conditions prior to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in search of a desirable method for evaluating post-prostatectomy incontinence. Anticancer Res 36(8):4293–4298

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. von Bodman C, Matsushita K, Savage C, Matikainen MP, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Rabbani F, Akin O, Sandhu JS (2012) Recovery of urinary function after radical prostatectomy: predictors of urinary function on preoperative prostate magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 187(3):945–950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kadono Y, Ueno S, Iwamoto D, Takezawa Y, Nohara T, Izumi K, Mizokami A, Namiki M (2015) Chronological urodynamic evaluation of changing bladder and urethral functions after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Urology 85(6):1441–1447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.02.029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Matsukawa Y, Hattori R, Yoshikawa Y, Ono Y, Gotoh M (2009) Laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy: urodynamic evaluation of vesicourethral function. Int J Urol 16(4):393–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Schroeck FR, Krupski TL, Sun L, Albala DM, Price MM, Polascik TJ, Robertson CN, Tewari AK, Moul JW (2008) Satisfaction and regret after open retropubic or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 54(4):785–793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2008.06.063

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schroeck FR, Krupski TL, Stewart SB, Banez LL, Gerber L, Albala DM, Moul JW (2012) Pretreatment expectations of patients undergoing robotic assisted laparoscopic or open retropubic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 187(3):894–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kakehi Y, Kamoto T, Shiraishi T, Ogawa O, Suzukamo Y, Fukuhara S, Saito Y, Tobisu K, Kakizoe T, Shibata T, Fukuda H, Akakura K, Suzuki H, Shinohara N, Egawa S, Irie A, Sato T, Maeda O, Meguro N, Sumiyoshi Y, Suzuki T, Shimizu N, Arai Y, Terai A, Kato T, Habuchi T, Fujimoto H, Niwakawa M (2008) Prospective evaluation of selection criteria for active surveillance in Japanese patients with stage T1cN0M0 prostate cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 38(2):122–128. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hym161

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kelleher CJ, Cardozo LD, Khullar V, Salvatore S (1997) A new questionnaire to assess the quality of life of urinary incontinent women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104(12):1374–1379. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11006.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hunskaar S, Burgio K, Diokno A, Herzog AR, Hjälmås K, Lapitan MC (2003) Epidemiology and natural history of urinary incontinence in women. Urology 62(4):16–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(03)00755-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Haga N, Ogawa S, Yabe M, Akaihata H, Hata J, Sato Y, Ishibashi K, Hasegawa O, Kikuchi K, Shishido F, Kojima Y (2015) Factors contributing to early recovery of urinary continence analyzed by pre- and postoperative pelvic anatomical features at robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 29(6):683–690. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0708

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Haga N, Ogawa S, Yabe M, Akaihata H, Hata J, Sato Y, Ishibashi K, Hasegawa O, Kikuchi K, Shishido F, Kojima Y (2014) Association between postoperative pelvic anatomic features on magnetic resonance imaging and lower tract urinary symptoms after radical prostatectomy. Urology 84(3):642–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.04.044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Basto MY, Vidyasagar C, te Marvelde L, Freeborn H, Birch E, Landau A, Murphy DG, Moon D (2014) Early urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in older Australian men. BJU Int 114(Suppl 1):29–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12800

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Novara G, Ficarra V, D’Elia C, Secco S, Cioffi A, Cavalleri S, Artibani W (2010) Evaluating urinary continence and preoperative predictors of urinary continence after robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 184(3):1028–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.04.069

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Shao IH, Chang YH, Hou CM, Lin ZF, Wu CT (2018) Predictors of short-term and long-term incontinence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Int Med Res 46(1):421–429. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060517715396

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lee JK, Assel M, Thong AE, Sjoberg DD, Mulhall JP, Sandhu J, Vickers AJ, Ehdaie B (2015) Unexpected long-term improvements in urinary and erectile function in a large cohort of men with self-reported outcomes following radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 68(5):899–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.074

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank everyone involved in this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, 1 Hikarigaoka, Fukushima, 960-1295, Japan

    Yoshimasa Kurimura, Nobuhiro Haga, Tomohiko Yanagida, Ryo Tanji, Akifumi Onagi, Ruriko Honda, Kanako Matsuoka, Seiji Hoshi, Junya Hata, Mitsutaka Onoda, Yuichi Sato, Hidenori Akaihata, Masao Kataoka, Soichiro Ogawa, Kei Ishibashi & Yoshiyuki Kojima

  2. Department of Urology, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

    Yoshimasa Kurimura & Akio Matsubara

Authors
  1. Yoshimasa Kurimura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nobuhiro Haga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tomohiko Yanagida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ryo Tanji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Akifumi Onagi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ruriko Honda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kanako Matsuoka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Seiji Hoshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Junya Hata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Mitsutaka Onoda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Yuichi Sato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Hidenori Akaihata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Masao Kataoka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Soichiro Ogawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Kei Ishibashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Akio Matsubara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Yoshiyuki Kojima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoshimasa Kurimura.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to report.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kurimura, Y., Haga, N., Yanagida, T. et al. The preoperative pad test as a predictor of urinary incontinence and quality of life after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective, observational, clinical study. Int Urol Nephrol 52, 67–76 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-019-02301-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-019-02301-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation