3rd Annual Jefferson Urology Symposium: Men’s Health Forum

© The Canadian Journal of Urology TM : International Supplement, August 2020 Urethral bulking agents Urethral bulking agents have been studied as a minimally invasive treatment for male SUI. While the 2019 AUA/SUFU guidelines did list urethral bulking agents as a treatment option, it noted the low efficacy, high re-treatment rate, and rare chance for cure. 2 Conclusion IPT remains a common and important problem for men and is associated with reduced quality of life. Evaluation of these men requires careful analysis of timing of urine leakage and associated symptoms. SUI, UUI, and mixed incontinence may manifest after RP, radiation therapy, or surgery for BPH and it is imperative for the urologist to determine the contribution of each type tomen’s symptoms. Surveys such as the ICIQ-UI SF and M-ISI are easy office assessment tools that should be part of the evaluation armamentarium. SUI after RP remains the major driver for IPT. Advances in surgical technique in RP have reduced the rates of SUI, however this is still a significant problem. The benefits of PFMT in the prevention/ improvement of SUI are well established and further research may refine the timing and implementation of these measures. The AUS and male urethral sling remain themost widely used andwell-studied surgical interventions for male SUI. Long term data supports the AUS as the gold standard therapy which may be used regardless of SUI severity, bladder dynamics, prior radiation, or revision surgery. Men should be counseled on the risks and benefits of all available options and care should be taken to exclude competing pathology that may affect results. Das ET AL. 42 References 1. Coyne KS, Kvasz M, Ireland AM, Milsom I, Kopp ZS, Chapple CR. Urinary incontinence and its relationship to mental health and health-related quality of life in men and women in Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Eur Urol 2012;61(1):88-95. 2. Sandhu JS, Breyer B, Comiter C et al. Incontinence after prostate treatment: AUA/SUFU guideline. J Urol 2019;202(2):369-378. 3. Shamliyan TA, Wyman JF, Ping R, Wilt TJ, Kane RL. Male urinary incontinence: prevalence, risk factors, and preventative interventions. Rev Urol 2009;11(3):145-165. 4. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC et al. Post-prostatectomy incontinence: etiology, evaluation, andmanagement. Turk J Urol 2014;40(1):1-8. 5. Kang SG, Shim JS, Onol F, Bhat KRS, Patel VR. Lessons learned from 12,000 robotic radical prostatectomies: Is the journey as important as the outcome? Investig Clin Urol 2020 Jan;61(1):1-10. 6. Fernández RA, García-Hermoso A, Solera-Martínez M, Correa MT, Morales AF, Martínez-Vizcaíno V. Improvement of continence rate with pelvic floor muscle training post- prostatectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Urol Int 2015; 94(2):125-132. 7. Hoyland K, Vasdev N, Abrof A, Boustead G. Post-radical prostatectomy incontinence: etiology and prevention. Rev Urol 2014;16(4):181-188. 8. Song W, Kim CK, Park BK et al. Impact of preoperative and postoperativemembranous urethral lengthmeasured by 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging on urinary continence recovery after robotic‐assisted radical prostatectomy. Can Urol Assoc J 2017;11(3-4):E93‐E99. 9. Groutz A, Blaivas JG, Chaikin DC, Weiss JP, Verhaaren M. The pathophysiology of post-radical prostatectomy incontinence: a clinical andvideo urodynamic study. J Urol 2000;163(6):1767-1770. 10. ThiruchelvamN, Cruz F, KirbyM, TubaroA, Chapple CR, Sievert KD.Areviewof detrusor overactivity and the overactive bladder after radical prostate cancer treatment. BJUInt 2015;116(6):853-861. 11. Zwaans BM, Nicolai HG, Chancellor MB, Lamb LE. Challenges and opportunities in radiation-induced hemorrhagic cystitis. Rev Urol 2016;18(2):57‐65. 12. de Groat WC, Yoshimura N. Afferent nerve regulation of bladder function in health and disease. Handb Exp Pharmacol 2009;(194):91‐138. 13. HoffmanD, VijayV, PengMet al. Effect of radiation onmale stress urinary incontinence and the role of urodynamic assessment. Urology 2019;125:58-63. 14. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R. Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)--incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol 2006;50(5):969-979. 15. Cho MC, Park JH, Jeong MS et al. Predictor of de novo urinary incontinence following holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Neurourol Urodyn 2011;30(7):1343-1349. 16. Milios JE, Ackland TR, Green DJ. Pelvic floor muscle training in radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial of the impacts onpelvic floormuscle function andurinary incontinence. BMC Urol 2019;19(1):116. 17. Sridhar AN, Abozaid M, Rajan P et al. Surgical techniques to optimize early urinary continence recovery post robot assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep 2017; 18(9):71. 18. Phukan C, Mclean A, Nambiar A et al. Retzius sparing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy vs. conventional robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol 2020;38(5):1123-1134. 19. Avery K, Donovan J, Peters T, Shaw C, Gotoh M, Abrams P. ICIQ: a brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinence. Neurourol.Urodyn 2004; 23(4):322-330. 20. Suskind AM, Dunn RL, Morgan DM, Delancey JOL, McGuide EJ, Wei JT. The Michigan incontinence symptom index (M-ISI): a clinical measure for type, severity, and bother related to urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2014;33(7):1128-1134. 21. Yi YA, Keith CG, Graziano CE et al. Strong correlation between standing cough test and 24-hour pad weights in the evaluation of male stress urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2020;39(1):319-323. 22. Krhut J, Zachoval R, Smith PP et al. Pad weight testing in the evaluation of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2014;33(4): 507-510. 23. Dylewski DA, Jamison MG, Borawski KM, Sherman ND, Amundsen CL, Webster GD. A statistical comparison of pad numbers versus pad weights in the quantification of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2007;26(1):3-7.