Cargando…

Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study

BACKGROUND: Due to the usage of various measurement methods and definitions, comparing continence rates after radical prostatectomy is a challenging task. This study compares continence rates based on different methods and aims to identify the definition for continence which agrees best with the pat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Holze, Sigrun, Mende, Meinhard, Healy, Karl V., Koehler, Norbert, Gansera, Lutz, Truss, Michael C., Rebmann, Udo, Degener, Stephan, Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6659208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31345192
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0500-6
_version_ 1783439088105291776
author Holze, Sigrun
Mende, Meinhard
Healy, Karl V.
Koehler, Norbert
Gansera, Lutz
Truss, Michael C.
Rebmann, Udo
Degener, Stephan
Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe
author_facet Holze, Sigrun
Mende, Meinhard
Healy, Karl V.
Koehler, Norbert
Gansera, Lutz
Truss, Michael C.
Rebmann, Udo
Degener, Stephan
Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe
author_sort Holze, Sigrun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Due to the usage of various measurement methods and definitions, comparing continence rates after radical prostatectomy is a challenging task. This study compares continence rates based on different methods and aims to identify the definition for continence which agrees best with the patients’ subjective assessment of continence. Additionally, continence was controlled for multiple influencing factors. METHODS: This prospective multicentre study was carried out in seven hospitals throughout Germany. Before and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery self-reporting questionnaires were completed and returned by 329 (84.4%) of 390 eligible patients. The questionnaires were independently evaluated and analysed by a third party. Association of continence with demographic, operative, and tumour factors in an ongoing comprehensive prostate cancer database was evaluated. RESULTS: The continence rate drops substantially for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy but increases again with time. Concrete numbers vary considerably depending on definition – 44% at 3 months and 68% at 12 months after surgery (0 pads) vs. 71 and 90% (0–1 pads). Significant confounding variables regarding continence rate are nerve-sparing procedure, categorized Gleason score, rehabilitative cure treatment, and pelvic floor training. The definition of 0 pads for continence coincides greater than 0–1 pads with the patients’ self-assessment of being continent. CONCLUSION: A standardized definition for continence would be desirable, as it is one of the most important preconditions to guarantee sound comparison of continence rates. Since there are enough other factors that make comparison difficult, we suggest using the definition of “0 pads”. It is easily measured objectively, leaves no room for interpretation, and agrees best with the patients’ self-assessment. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12894-019-0500-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6659208
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66592082019-08-01 Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study Holze, Sigrun Mende, Meinhard Healy, Karl V. Koehler, Norbert Gansera, Lutz Truss, Michael C. Rebmann, Udo Degener, Stephan Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe BMC Urol Research Article BACKGROUND: Due to the usage of various measurement methods and definitions, comparing continence rates after radical prostatectomy is a challenging task. This study compares continence rates based on different methods and aims to identify the definition for continence which agrees best with the patients’ subjective assessment of continence. Additionally, continence was controlled for multiple influencing factors. METHODS: This prospective multicentre study was carried out in seven hospitals throughout Germany. Before and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery self-reporting questionnaires were completed and returned by 329 (84.4%) of 390 eligible patients. The questionnaires were independently evaluated and analysed by a third party. Association of continence with demographic, operative, and tumour factors in an ongoing comprehensive prostate cancer database was evaluated. RESULTS: The continence rate drops substantially for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy but increases again with time. Concrete numbers vary considerably depending on definition – 44% at 3 months and 68% at 12 months after surgery (0 pads) vs. 71 and 90% (0–1 pads). Significant confounding variables regarding continence rate are nerve-sparing procedure, categorized Gleason score, rehabilitative cure treatment, and pelvic floor training. The definition of 0 pads for continence coincides greater than 0–1 pads with the patients’ self-assessment of being continent. CONCLUSION: A standardized definition for continence would be desirable, as it is one of the most important preconditions to guarantee sound comparison of continence rates. Since there are enough other factors that make comparison difficult, we suggest using the definition of “0 pads”. It is easily measured objectively, leaves no room for interpretation, and agrees best with the patients’ self-assessment. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12894-019-0500-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6659208/ /pubmed/31345192 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0500-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Holze, Sigrun
Mende, Meinhard
Healy, Karl V.
Koehler, Norbert
Gansera, Lutz
Truss, Michael C.
Rebmann, Udo
Degener, Stephan
Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe
Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study
title Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study
title_full Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study
title_fullStr Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study
title_short Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study
title_sort comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6659208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31345192
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0500-6
work_keys_str_mv AT holzesigrun comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy
AT mendemeinhard comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy
AT healykarlv comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy
AT koehlernorbert comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy
AT ganseralutz comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy
AT trussmichaelc comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy
AT rebmannudo comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy
AT degenerstephan comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy
AT stolzenburgjensuwe comparisonofvariouscontinencedefinitionsinalargegroupofpatientsundergoingradicalprostatectomyamulticentreprospectivestudy