Suppr超能文献

遏制前列腺切除术后轻至中度尿失禁的趋势:经闭孔男性吊带与人工尿道括约肌的回顾性比较

Stemming the tide of mild to moderate post-prostatectomy incontinence: A retrospective comparison of transobturator male slings and the artificial urinary sphincter.

作者信息

Hoy Nathan Y, Rourke Keith F

机构信息

Division of Urology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.

出版信息

Can Urol Assoc J. 2014 Jul;8(7-8):273-7. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.2108.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The AUS remains the gold standard treatment for post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI), although most patients with mild-moderate PPI prefer a sling without strong evidence of procedural equivalence. This study compares outcomes of 2 procedures for the treatment of mild-moderate PPI.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 124 patients (76 transobturator sling, 48 AUS) with mild-moderate PPI requiring intervention over an 8-year period. The primary outcome was continence. Secondary outcomes included global patient satisfaction, improvement, and complication rates. Mild to moderate incontinence was defined as requiring ≤5 pads/day.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in age (66.2 vs. 68.1 years; p = 0.17) or prostate cancer characteristics for slings and AUS, respectively. AUS patients had higher Charlson comorbidity scores and were more likely to have previous radiotherapy. Median length of follow up was 24 months for slings and 42 months for AUS. There was no difference in continence rates, 88.2% vs. 87.5% (p = 0.79), rate of improvement, 94.7% vs. 95.8% (p = 1.00), or patient satisfaction, 93.4% vs. 91.7% (p = 0.73), for slings and AUS, respectively. Complication rates were equivalent (19.7% vs. 16.7%; p = 1.00), though a significantly higher proportion of complications with AUS were Clavien Grade 3 (0% vs. 75%; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

For mild to moderate PPI there is no difference in continence, satisfaction, or improvement rates, between AUS and slings. AUS complications tend to be more severe. Our study supports the use of slings as first-line treatment for mild-moderate PPI.

摘要

引言

人工尿道括约肌(AUS)仍是前列腺切除术后尿失禁(PPI)的金标准治疗方法,尽管大多数轻中度PPI患者更倾向于使用吊带,但目前尚无强有力的证据表明这两种治疗方法在疗效上相当。本研究比较了两种治疗轻中度PPI的手术效果。

方法

回顾性分析了124例轻中度PPI患者(76例行经闭孔吊带术,48例行AUS植入术)在8年期间的治疗情况。主要观察指标为尿失禁控制情况。次要观察指标包括患者总体满意度、症状改善情况及并发症发生率。轻至中度尿失禁定义为每天使用尿垫≤5片。

结果

吊带术组和AUS植入术组患者的年龄(分别为66.2岁和68.1岁;p = 0.17)以及前列腺癌特征无显著差异。AUS植入术组患者的Charlson合并症评分更高,且更有可能接受过放疗。吊带术组的中位随访时间为24个月,AUS植入术组为42个月。吊带术组和AUS植入术组的尿失禁控制率分别为88.2%和87.5%(p = 0.79),症状改善率分别为94.7%和95.8%(p = 1.00),患者满意度分别为93.4%和91.7%(p = 0.73),均无显著差异。并发症发生率相当(分别为19.7%和16.7%;p = 1.00),不过AUS植入术组中Clavien 3级并发症的比例显著更高(分别为0%和75%;p = 0.006)。

结论

对于轻至中度PPI,AUS和吊带术在尿失禁控制、患者满意度及症状改善率方面无差异。AUS的并发症往往更严重。我们的研究支持将吊带术作为轻中度PPI的一线治疗方法。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

10
Urethral erosion of transobturator male sling.经闭孔男性吊带的尿道糜烂
Urology. 2009 Feb;73(2):443.e19-20. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2008.02.043. Epub 2008 Apr 9.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验