Objectives: to analyze continence and complications rates after male slings as first line surgical treatment, in order to improve patient counseling for the management of SUI postprostatectomy. Method: A MedLine search using specified search terms was done on January 23, 2012. This research rendered 160 records. Results: No controlled trial was available for analysis. The majority of papers dealing with out- come and complications came from a few centres. At a median follow-up of 15 months the pooled cure rates for all kinds of slings was 77.4; in the AdVance group the pooled cure rates was 72.5%; in the InVance group it was 74.2% while in the Remeex group it was 84.3%. Conclusions: Only a few number observational studies addressed review selection criteria. The pooled overall cure rates is high but there are no data concerning reliable pre- and postopera- tive prognostic factors affecting treatment failure and complications rates, thus it is not possi- ble to have suitable criteria for a better patient selection. The statistically pooled results obtained should be interpreted with caution because of several limitations due to several study selection limitations: observational study design, few number of analysed studies, heterogene- ity, lack of outcome definition and standardisation, between-study variability, high risk of bias

Artibani, W

Cerruto, Ma

D'Elia, C

Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia

English

Maria Angela Cerruto

Carolina D'Elia

Walter Artibani

Directory of Open Access Journals

Continence and complications rates after male slings as primary surgery for post-prostatectomy incontinence: A systematic review

Hypothesis / aims of study
Radical prostatectomy (RP) is the most common treatment option for prostate cancer. Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common and costly complication in men after RP, often adversely affecting their quality of life. Despite improvements in surgical techniques and a better understanding of pelvic anatomy, the reported stress urinary incontinence (SUI) rates are between 5% and 48%. Conservative treatment of the urinary leakage represents the first line management of UI after RP, but the value of the various conservative approaches to treat postprostatectomy UI after RP remains uncertain. When conservative treatments are unsuccessful after a reasonable period of time, invasive therapies should be considered. According to the last International Consultation on Incontinence Recommendations, for SUI due to sphincter incompetence the recommended option is the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) (Grade B); other options, such as a male sling, may be considered (Grade C). These low grades of recommendation can be explained by the fact that, although there are several options for surgical treatment of UI after prostatectomy, surprisingly only one randomised clinical trial was identified in the literature, comparing AUS implantation and injectable treatment with Macroplastique. For other surgical procedures such as male slings, Pro-ACT system, other bulking agents and stem-cell therapy, only non-randomised studies were identified, making impossible to answer questions about treatment comparison in terms of efficacy, safety, complications and long term results. The aim of this review was to analyze continence and complications rates after male slings as first line surgical treatment, in order to improve patient counseling for the management of SUI postprostatectomy.
Study design, materials and methods
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was used to help guide this report [8]. We conducted a PubMed database search through January 2012 for relevant prospective cohort studies and case series that met the following inclusion criteria: English language; adults with SUI postprostatectomy who underwent male slings as first surgical option for continence recovery; studies carried out on ≥ 20 patients with a mean follow-up of ≥1 year; because the majority of papers dealing with outcome and complications came from a few centres, only the most recent publication(s) from each centre were included to avoid the same patients being presented several times. Multiple free-text searches were performed. In addition, other significant studies cited in the reference lists of the selected papers were considered. Few studies presented their original data in a format amenable to meta-analysis. A single weight-adjusted mean or proportion for each variable or outcome was computed for each of the nonrandomized studies. To derive pooled estimates of proportions for the outcomes explored, random effects models were used. Pooling was conducted using Comprehensive Meta Analysis Version 2.2.046 (Englewood, NJ). Given that this review assessed measures of prevalence, publication bias was not evaluated.
Results
From screening 160 records, 49 full-text articles were retrieved with only 5 articles included in the systematic review (figure 1). The 5 included articles involved 356 participants living in 8 countries with a median follow-up after sling implant of 15 months (interquartile range, 12-21) and sling surgeries conducted between 2002 and 2009. Patients’ mean age at time of surgery was 68.06 (standard deviation, 1.37) years. Study characteristics and quality are summarized in Table 1. No controlled trial was available for analysis. The majority of papers dealing with outcome and complications came from a few centres. At a median follow-up of 15 months the pooled cure rates for all kinds of slings was 77.4% (95% CI 66.0-85.8); in the AdVance group the pooled cure rates was 72.5 (95% CI 65.0-68.8); in the InVance group it was 74.2% (95% CI 56.3-86.5) while in the Remeex group it was 84.3% (95% CI 71.6-92). Figure 2 pooled the continence rates achieved after the analysed sling procedures. Interpretation of results
The male slings approved for use currently include a variety of types: bone anchored slings, adjustable slings, and transobturator slings. This review tried to systematically assessed the outcomes of male slings used as the first line treatment, after conservative therapy failure, for the treatment of post-prostatectomy SUI. Only a few number of the observational studies published in the literature addressed review selection criteria. The pooled overall cure rates is high but there are no data concerning reliable pre- and postoperative prognostic factors affecting treatment failure and complications rates, thus it is not possible to have suitable criteria for a better patient selection. The statistically pooled results obtained should be interpreted with caution because of several limitations due to several study selection limitations: observational study design, few number of analysed studies, heterogeneity, lack of outcome definition and standardisation, between-study variability, high risk of bias.
Concluding message
In order to better select patients for male slings in the management of post-prostatectomy SUI as first line treatment, it is mandatory to carried out both well designed randomized clinical trials and longitudinal cohort studies, using standardised protocols and outcome measures

CERRUTO, Maria Angela

D'ELIA, Carolina

ARTIBANI, Walter

Catalogo dei prodotti della ricerca

410 Cerruto M A1, D'Elia C2, Artibani W1 1. Urology Clinic, AOUI of Verona, Italy, 2. Urology Unit, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy  CONTINENCE AND COMPLICATIONS RATES AFTER MALE SLINGS AS PRIMARY SURGERY FOR POST-PROSTATECTOMY INCONTINENCE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW  Hypothesis / aims of study Radical prostatectomy (RP) is the most common treatment option for prostate cancer. Urinary incontinence (UI) is a common and costly complication in men after RP, often adversely affecting their quality of life. Despite improvements in surgical techniques and a better understanding of pelvic anatomy, the reported stress urinary incontinence (SUI) rates are between 5% and 48%. Conservative treatment of the urinary leakage represents the first line management of UI after RP, but the value of the various conservative approaches to treat postprostatectomy UI after RP remains uncertain. When conservative treatments are unsuccessful after a reasonable period of time, invasive therapies should be considered. According to the last International Consultation on Incontinence Recommendations, for SUI due to sphincter incompetence the recommended option is the artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) (Grade B); other options, such as a male sling, may be considered (Grade C). These low grades of recommendation can be explained by the fact that, although there are several options for surgical treatment of UI after prostatectomy, surprisingly only one randomised clinical trial was identified in the literature, comparing AUS implantation and injectable treatment with Macroplastique. For other surgical procedures such as male slings, Pro-ACT system, other bulking agents and stem-cell therapy, only non-randomised studies were identified, making impossible to answer questions about treatment comparison in terms of efficacy, safety, complications and long term results. The aim of this review was to analyze continence and complications rates after male slings as first line surgical treatment, in order to improve patient counseling for the management of SUI postprostatectomy.  Study design, materials and methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was used to help guide this report [8]. We conducted a PubMed database search through January 2012 for relevant prospective cohort studies and case series that met the following inclusion criteria: English language; adults with SUI postprostatectomy who underwent male slings as first surgical option for continence recovery; studies carried out on ≥ 20 patients with a mean follow-up of ≥1 year; because the majority of papers dealing with outcome and complications came from a few centres, only the most recent publication(s) from each centre were included to avoid the same patients being presented several times. Multiple free-text searches were performed. In addition, other significant studies cited in the reference lists of the selected papers were considered. Few studies presented their original data in a format amenable to meta-analysis. A single weight-adjusted mean or proportion for each variable or outcome was computed for each of the nonrandomized studies. To derive pooled estimates of proportions for the outcomes explored, random effects models were used. Pooling was conducted using Comprehensive Meta Analysis Version 2.2.046 (Englewood, NJ). Given that this review assessed measures of prevalence, publication bias was not evaluated.   Results From screening 160 records, 49 full-text articles were retrieved with only 5 articles included in the systematic review (figure 1). The 5 included articles involved 356 participants living in 8 countries with a median follow-up after sling implant of 15 months (interquartile range, 12-21) and sling surgeries conducted between 2002 and 2009. Patients’ mean age at time of surgery was 68.06 (standard deviation, 1.37) years. Study characteristics and quality are summarized in Table 1. No controlled trial was available for analysis. The majority of papers dealing with outcome and complications came from a few centres.  Figure 1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram.   Table 1. Characteristics of included observational studies   At a median follow-up of 15 months the pooled cure rates for all kinds of slings was 77.4% (95% CI 66.0-85.8); in the AdVance group the pooled cure rates was 72.5 (95% CI 65.0-68.8); in the InVance group it was 74.2% (95% CI 56.3-86.5) while in the Remeex group it was 84.3% (95% CI 71.6-92). Figure 2 pooled the continence rates achieved after the analysed sling procedures.  Figure 2. Pooled analysis of reported overall cure rates.   Interpretation of results The male slings approved for use currently include a variety of types: bone anchored slings, adjustable slings, and transobturator slings. This review tried to systematically assessed the outcomes of male slings used as the first line treatment, after conservative therapy failure, for the treatment of post-prostatectomy SUI. Only a few number of the observational studies published in the literature addressed review selection criteria. The pooled overall cure rates is high but there are no data concerning reliable pre- and postoperative prognostic factors affecting treatment failure and complications rates, thus it is not possible to have suitable criteria for a better patient selection. The statistically pooled results obtained should be interpreted with caution because of several limitations due to several study selection limitations: observational study design, few number of analysed studies, heterogeneity, lack of outcome definition and standardisation, between-study variability, high risk of bias.  Concluding message In order to better select patients for male slings in the management of post-prostatectomy SUI as first line treatment, it is mandatory to carried out both well designed randomized clinical trials and longitudinal cohort studies, using standardised protocols and outcome measures.   Disclosures Funding: no source of funding nor grant Clinical Trial: No Subjects: HUMAN Ethics not Req'd: It is a systematic literature review Helsinki: Yes Informed Consent: No   

CONTINENCE AND COMPLICATIONS RATES AFTER MALE SLINGS AS PRIMARY SURGERY FOR POST-PROSTATECTOMY INCONTINENCE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

OBJECTIVES: to analyze continence and complications rates after male slings as
first line surgical treatment, in order to improve patient counseling for the
management of SUI postprostatectomy.
METHOD: A MedLine search using specified search terms was done on January 23,
2012. This research rendered 160 records.
RESULTS: No controlled trial was available for analysis. The majority of papers
dealing with out- come and complications came from a few centres. At a median
follow-up of 15 months the pooled cure rates for all kinds of slings was 77.4; in
the AdVance group the pooled cure rates was 72.5%; in the InVance group it was
74.2% while in the Remeex group it was 84.3%.
CONCLUSIONS: Only a few number observational studies addressed review selection
criteria. The pooled overall cure rates is high but there are no data concerning 
reliable pre- and postoperative prognostic factors affecting treatment failure
and complications rates, thus it is not possible to have suitable criteria for a 
better patient selection. The statistically pooled results obtained should be
interpreted with caution because of several limitations due to several study
selection limitations: observational study design, few number of analysed
studies, heterogeneity, lack of outcome definition and standardisation,
between-study variability, high risk of bias

Continence and complications rates after male slings as primary surgery for
post-prostatectomy incontinence: a systematic review.

Open Access Repository

Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 2013; 85, 292INTRODUCTIONRadical prostatectomy (RP) is the most common treat-ment option for prostate cancer, with more than 80 000RPs annually in the USA (1). Urinary incontinence (UI)is a common and costly complication in men after RP,often adversely affecting their quality of life (QoL) (2).Despite improvements in surgical techniques and a bet-ter understanding of pelvic anatomy, the reported stressurinary incontinence (SUI) rates are between 5% and48% (3). Conservative treatment of the urinary leakagerepresents the first line management of UI after RP, butthe value of the various conservative approaches to treatpostprostatectomy UI after RP remains uncertain (4).The last Cochrane systematic review on this topic foundthat there was conflicting information about the benefitof pelvic floor muscle training for either prevention orREVIEWContinence and complications rates after male slingsas primary surgery for post-prostatectomy incontinence:A systematic reviewMaria Angela Cerruto, Carolina D'Elia, Walter ArtibaniDepartment of Surgery Urology Clinic, University of Verona, Italy.Objectives: to analyze continence and complications rates after male slings as first linesurgical treatment, in order to improve patient counseling for the management of SUIpostprostatectomy. Method: A MedLine search using specified search terms was done on January 23,2012. This research rendered 160 records. Results: No controlled trial was available for analysis. The majority of papers dealing with out-come and complications came from a few centres. At a median follow-up of 15 months thepooled cure rates for all kinds of slings was 77.4; in the AdVance group the pooled cure rateswas 72.5%; in the InVance group it was 74.2% while in the Remeex group it was 84.3%.Conclusions: Only a few number observational studies addressed review selection criteria. Thepooled overall cure rates is high but there are no data concerning reliable pre- and postopera-tive prognostic factors affecting treatment failure and complications rates, thus it is not possi-ble to have suitable criteria for a better patient selection. The statistically pooled resultsobtained should be interpreted with caution because of several limitations due to several studyselection limitations: observational study design, few number of analysed studies, heterogene-ity, lack of outcome definition and standardisation, between-study variability, high risk of bias.KEY WORDS: Sling; Male incontinence; Radical prostatectomy; Continence; Complications.Submitted 17 July 2012; Accepted 31 December 2012 No conflict of interest declaredSummarytreatment of urine leakage after prostate surgery. Moreresearch of better quality is needed to assess conservativemanagements (4). When conservative treatments areunsuccessful after a reasonable period of time (e.g. 8-12weeks), invasive therapies should be considered (5).According to the last International Consultation onIncontinence Recommendations, for SUI due to sphincterincompetence the recommended option is the artificialurinary sphincter (AUS) (Grade B); other options, suchas a male sling, may be considered (Grade C) (5). Theselow grades of recommendation can be explained by thefact that, although there are several options for surgicaltreatment of UI after prostatectomy, surprisingly onlyone randomised clinical trial was identified in the litera-ture, comparing AUS implantation and injectable treat-Cerruto_Cont_Stesura Seveso  24/06/13  11:06  Pagina 9293Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 2013; 85, 2Continence and complications rates after male slings as primary surgery for post-prostatectomy incontinence: A systematic reviewlength of follow-up, time period of surgery, type of prosta-tectomy), sling types, outcomes (overall cure rates, com-plications rates). A single reviewer (MAC) assessed risk ofbias at the study level. The Downs-Black quality assess-ment tool (9) was used for nonrandomized studies; a score! 17 of 31 was considered higher quality.Few studies presented their original data in a formatamenable to meta-analysis. Articles that presented dataas a median and range were converted to means accord-ing to Hozo et al. (10). A single weight-adjusted mean orproportion for each variable or outcome was computedfor each of the nonrandomized studies. To derive pooledestimates of proportions for the outcomes explored, ran-dom effects models were used. Pooling was conductedusing Comprehensive Meta Analysis Version 2.2.046(Englewood, NJ). Given that this review assessed measuresof prevalence, publication bias was not evaluated. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONFrom screening 160 records, 49 full-text articles wereretrieved with only 5 articles included in the systematicreview (Figure 1). The 5 included articles involved 356participants living in 8 countries with a median follow-up after sling implant of 15 months (interquartile range,12-21) and sling surgeries conducted between 2002 and2009. Patients’ mean age at time of surgery was 68.06(standard deviation, 1.37) years. Study characteristicsand quality are summarized in Table 1 (11-15). ment with Macroplastique (6). For other surgical proce-dures such as male slings, Pro-ACT system, other bulk-ing agents and stem-cell therapy, only non-randomisedstudies were identified (7), making impossible to answerquestions about treatment comparison in terms of effica-cy, safety, complications and long term results. Despite the lack of information, when patients seekeffective and durable treatment to achieve a continencestatus, it is necessary to adequately make aware them ofcontinence rates and all possible complication of anyproposed treatment as first line surgical option. The aimof this review was to analyze continence and complica-tions rates after male slings as first line surgical treat-ment, in order to improve patient counseling for themanagement of SUI postprostatectomy. METHODSThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews andMeta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was used to help guidethis report (8). We conducted a PubMed database searchthrough January 2012 for relevant prospective cohortstudies and case series that met the following inclusioncriteria: English language; adults with SUI postprostatec-tomy who underwent male slings as first surgical optionfor continence recovery; studies carried out on ! 20patients with a mean follow-up of ! 1 year;because themajority of papers dealing with outcome and complica-tions came from a few centres, only the most recent pub-lication(s) from each centre were included to avoid thesame patients being presented several times. Multiple free-text searches were performed including thefollowing terms: Suburethral Slings, Suburethral Sling,Transobturator Tape, Transobturator Tapes, TransobturatorSuburethral Tape, Trans-Obturator Tape, Male sling, Maleslings, Argus sling, Advance sling, Invance sling, Remeex sling,Urinary Incontinence, Urinary Stress Incontinence, PostProstatectomy, Post-prostatectomy, Prostatectomy, Prosta -tectomies, Suprapubic Prostatectomies, Suprapubic Prosta -tectomy, Retropubic Prostatectomies, Retropubic Prosta -tectomy. In addition, other significant studies cited in thereference lists of the selected papers were considered. Bothauthors independently reviewed all records by title andabstract followed by full-text articles for those meeting thescreening criteria. Both authors independently abstracteddata on study details (authors, year of publication, jour-nal, location, study design), patient characteristics (age,Figure 1.Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram.Source Publication Journal Nation Patient Time period RP rate Patient Sling type Mean Riskyear number of surger (%) mean age follow-up of biasGrise P, et al. (11) 2011 Urology France 103 2007-2009 94.8 69.4 I-STOP TOMS 12 highCornu JN, et al. (12) 2011 BJU Int France 136 2007-2009 92 67.4 AdVance 21 highCornel EB, et al. (13) 2010 J Urol The Netherlands 35 2007-2008 80 68.5 AdVance 12 highGallagher BL, et al. (14) 2007 Urology USA 31 2002-2005 94 66 InVance 15 highSousa-Escandon A, et al. (15) 2007 Eur Urol Spain, Italy, 51 2002-2005 84.3 69 Remeex 32 highGreece, Germany,PortugalTable 1.Characteristics of included observational studies.160 records identified by Medline search49 records for full text screen5 recordsincluded in the analysis111 removed by title abstract/screen6 removed by full text screenCerruto_Cont_Stesura Seveso  24/06/13  11:06  Pagina 93Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 2013; 85, 2M.A. Cerruto, C. D'Elia, W. Artibani94ment in continence, necessitating long-term clean inter-mittent catheterization. The average time to removal ofthe sling because of infection was 99 days (range 35 to163). All these patients presented with pain and superfi-cial infections. In the Remeex case series (15) the meshwas removed in 1 case owing to urethral erosion and thevaritensor in 2 cases owing to infection. There were five(9.8%) uneventful intraoperative bladder perforations atthe postoperative period, and there were three mild per-ineal haematomas (5.9%). Most patients felt perineal dis-comfort or pain, which was easily treated with oral med-ications. CONCLUSIONThe male slings approved for use currently include avariety of types: bone anchored slings, adjustable slings,and transobturator slings. This review tried to systemat-ically assessed the outcomes of male slings used as thefirst line treatment, after conservative therapy failure, forthe treatment of post-prostatectomy SUI. Only a fewnumber of the observational studies published in the lit-erature addressed review selection criteria. The pooledoverall cure rates is high but there are no data concern-ing reliable pre- and postoperative prognostic factorsaffecting treatment failure and complications rates, thusit is not possible to have suitable criteria for a betterpatient selection. The statistically pooled results obtained should be inter-preted with caution because of several limitations due toseveral study selection limitations: observational studydesign, few number of analysed studies, heterogeneity,lack of outcome definition and standardisation,between-study variability, high risk of bias.In order to better select patients for male slings in themanagement of post-prostatectomy SUI as first line treat-ment, it is mandatory to carried out both well designedrandomized clinical trials and longitudinal cohort stud-ies, using standardised protocols and outcome measures. REFERENCES1. United States Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (USA). Available at:http://hcupnet.ahrq.gov/. Accessed January 2012. 2. Haab F, Beley S, Cornu JN, et al. Urinary and sexual disordersfollowing localised prostate cancer management. Bull Cancer. 2010;97:1537-49.3. Schröde A, Abrams P, Andersson KE, et al. Guidelines on urinaryincontinence. In Arnheim AG, editor. EAU guidelines. Arnheim, theNetherlands: European Association of Urology. 2010; p.11-28. 4. Campbell SE, Glazener CM, Hunter KF, et al. Conservative man-agement for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence. CochraneDatabase Syst Rev. 2012; 1:CD001843. 5. Abrams P, Andersson KE, Birder L, et al. Fourth InternationalConsultation on Incontinence Recommendations of the InternationalScientific Committee: Evaluation and Treatment of UrinaryIncontinence, Pelvic Organ Prolapse, and Fecal Incontinence.Neurourol Urodyn. 2010; 29:213-240. 6. Imamoglu MA, Tuygun C, Bakirtas H, et al. The comparison ofartificial urinary sphincter implantation and endourethral macroplas-The types of slings considered were: the 4-arm I-STOPTOMS transobturator male sling (CL Medical) (11) (thatis an adapted version of the 2-arm TOMS bulbar sling)(16); the AdVance sling (12, 13) (a retrourethral tran-sobturator sling working by relocating the lax anddescended supporting structures of the posterior urethraand sphincter region after prostate surgery into the for-mer preprostatectomy position (17); the InVance sling(American Medical System) (14) (a nonadjustable slingsystem characterised by a silicon-coated polyester slingpositioned under the bulbar urethra via a perineal inci-sion to obtain a compression (18); the Remeex system(15) (a readjustable sling positioned under the bulbarurethra (19). Figure 2 pooled the continence ratesachieved after the analysed sling procedures. At a medi-an follow-up of 15 months the pooled cure rates for allkinds of slings was 77.4% (95% CI 66.0-85.8); in theAdVance group the pooled cure rates was 72.5 (95% CI65.0-68.8); in the InVance group it was 74.2% (95% CI56.3-86.5) while in the Remeex group it was 84.3%(95% CI 71.6-92). These statistically pooled resultsshould be interpreted with caution because of severallimitations due to several study selection limitations:study design, number of analysed studies, between-study variability, high risk of bias. Concerning overallcomplications rate it was impossible to obtain this infor-mation. Grise et al. did not report complications, such asbladder perforation, intraoperative bleeding (> 200 mL),or nerve, bowel, or vascular injury, occurred during theimplant of the I-STOP TOMS male sling, except forwounding of the corpus cavernosum in 4% ofpatients (11). The authors reported a successful catheterremoval 48 hours after surgery in 98.9% of patients.Moreover, 97.3%-100% were free of urinary tract infec-tion at the different follow-up visits, and 96.5%-100.0%of the patients had not experienced urinary tract infec-tion in the month before the visits. Immediately after theAdVance implant, Cornu et al. (12) reported only twocases of dysuria, one case of perineal haematoma andtwo cases of perineal paresthesia. During follow-up 10%of 10% of patients had perineal pain and 14% ofpatients had mild dysuria, but none require surgicalmanagement. In the other case series (13) complicationsdeveloped in 2 patients, including sling infection andpostoperative urinary retention in 1 each. In the InVancegroup (14) 4 patients (13%) underwent sling removal;two removals were because of infection (both of thesepatients had undergone previous radiotherapy), onebecause of pain, and one because of the lack of improve-Figure 2.Pooled analysis of reported overall cure rates.Grise P, et al. (11), 2011Cornu JN, et al. (12), 2011Cornel EB, et al. (13), 2010Gallagher BL, et al. (14), 2007Sousa-Escandon A, et al. (15), 2007Cerruto_Cont_Stesura Seveso  24/06/13  11:06  Pagina 9495Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 2013; 85, 2Continence and complications rates after male slings as primary surgery for post-prostatectomy incontinence: A systematic reviewtique injection for the treatment of postprostatectomy incontinence.Eur Urol. 2005; 47:209-13. 7. Silva LA, Andriolo RB, Atallah AN, da Silva EM. Surgery forstress urinary incontinence due to presumed sphincter deficiencyafter prostate surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(4):CD008306.8. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaf J, et al. Preferred reporting items forsystematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRIsMa statement. BMJ.2009; 339:332-336. 9. Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating checklist for assess-ment of the methodological quality both randomized and non-ran-domized studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol CommunityHealth. 1998; 52:377-384.10. Hozo SP, Djubegovic B, Hozo I. Estimating the mean and vari-ance from median, range and the size of the sample. BMC Med ResMethodol. 2005; 5:13. 11. Grise P, Vautherin R, Njinou-Ngninkeu B, et al. I-Stop TOMSTransobturator Male Sling, a Minimally Invasive Treatment forPost-prostatectomy Incontinence: Continence Improvement andTolerability. Urology. 2012; 79:458-63.12. Cornu JN, Sèbe P, Ciofu C, et al. Mid-term evaluation of thetransobturator male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence: focuson prognostic factors. BJU Int. 2011; 108:236-40.13. Cornel EB, Elzevier HW, Putter H. Can advance transobturatorsling suspension cure male urinary postoperative stress inconti-nence? J Urol. 2010; 183:1459-63.14. Gallagher BL, Dwyer NT, Gaynor-Krupnick DM, et al.Objective and quality-of-life outcomes with bone-anchored male bul-bourethral sling. Urology. 2007; 69:1090-4.15. Sousa-Escandón A, Cabrera J, Mantovani F, et al. Adjustablesuburethral sling (male remeex system) in the treatment of malestress urinary incontinence: a multicentric European study. EurUrol. 2007; 52:1473-9.16. Grise P, Geraud M, Lienhart J, et al. Transobturator male slingTOMS for the treatment of stress post-prostatectomy incontinence,initial experience and results with one year’s experience. Int Braz JUrol. 2009; 35:706-713. 17. Rehder P, Gozzi C. Transobturator sling suspension for male uri-nary incontinence including post-radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol.2007; 52:860-7.18. Fassi-Fehri H, Bader L, Cherass A, et al. Efficacy of theInVanceTM male sling in men with stress urinary incontinence. EurUrol. 2007; 51:498-503.19. Sousa-Escandon A, Cabrera J, Mantovani F, et al. Externally read-justable sling for treatment of male stress urinary incontinence: pointsof technique and preliminary results. J Endourol. 2004; 18:113-8. CorrespondenceMaria Angela Cerruto, MDmariaangela.cerruto@univr.it Carolina D’Elia, MD, FEBU (Corresponding Author)karolinedelia@gmail.comWalter Artibani, MDwalter.artibani@univr.itUrology Clinic, Department of Surgery University of Verona & AOUI, p.le L Scuro 10 - 37134 Verona, ItalyCerruto_Cont_Stesura Seveso  24/06/13  11:06  Pagina 95

https://www.openaccessrepository.it/record/62604/files/fulltext.pdf

Continence and complications rates after male slings as primary surgery for post-prostatectomy incontinence: A systematic review

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Directory of Open Access Journals

Catalogo dei prodotti della ricerca

Catalogo dei prodotti della ricerca

Open Access Repository