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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |