Cargando…

Evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

Background: Post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) is a frequent and feared complication that can affect approximately 25% of patients. Between 1 and 10% of patients suffering from PPI will require surgery. The effectiveness of the available surgical interventions has only been compar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Choiniere, Roselyne, Richard, Patrick O., Morin, Melanie, Tu, Le-Mai, Guyatt, Gordon H., Violette, Philippe D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7689604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33381297
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.19484.1
_version_ 1783613893309890560
author Choiniere, Roselyne
Richard, Patrick O.
Morin, Melanie
Tu, Le-Mai
Guyatt, Gordon H.
Violette, Philippe D.
author_facet Choiniere, Roselyne
Richard, Patrick O.
Morin, Melanie
Tu, Le-Mai
Guyatt, Gordon H.
Violette, Philippe D.
author_sort Choiniere, Roselyne
collection PubMed
description Background: Post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) is a frequent and feared complication that can affect approximately 25% of patients. Between 1 and 10% of patients suffering from PPI will require surgery. The effectiveness of the available surgical interventions has only been compared in a few randomized controlled trials and the available reviews have important limitations regarding both benefits and harms that make them insufficient to inform decision-making. The aim of the study is to provide systematic summaries of benefits and harms of contemporary surgical treatment options for PPI through systematic review and meta-analysis using GRADE methodology and reporting in accord with the PRISMA-P statement. Methods: Studies pertaining to bulking agents, male synthetic slings, compressive balloon systems (ProACT) or artificial urinary sphincters (AUS) used for the treatment of patients suffering from PPI will be included. A systematic search will be conducted using the OVID and PubMED platforms in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases, and reference lists of relevant reviews and guidelines. Trained independent reviewers will conduct study selection and data extraction. Outcomes will include the number of pads used per day, the 24-h pad weight test, the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) and the Incontinence Quality of Life (IQOL) as possible benefits and the reoperations, the Clavien-Dindo complications and the other reported adverse events as the harms. When possible, pooled analyses will be completed. Risk of bias will be assessed using the CLARITY tools and a new tool for the before-and-after studies without a control group. Finally, study heterogeneity will be assessed, publication bias will be evaluated with funnel plots and quality of evidence rated for each outcome. Discussion: Our study will address patient-important outcomes and will be useful in clinical decision-making as well as identifying key elements for future research. Study registration: PROSPERO: CRD42018073923 05/12/2018
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7689604
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76896042020-12-29 Evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol Choiniere, Roselyne Richard, Patrick O. Morin, Melanie Tu, Le-Mai Guyatt, Gordon H. Violette, Philippe D. F1000Res Study Protocol Background: Post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) is a frequent and feared complication that can affect approximately 25% of patients. Between 1 and 10% of patients suffering from PPI will require surgery. The effectiveness of the available surgical interventions has only been compared in a few randomized controlled trials and the available reviews have important limitations regarding both benefits and harms that make them insufficient to inform decision-making. The aim of the study is to provide systematic summaries of benefits and harms of contemporary surgical treatment options for PPI through systematic review and meta-analysis using GRADE methodology and reporting in accord with the PRISMA-P statement. Methods: Studies pertaining to bulking agents, male synthetic slings, compressive balloon systems (ProACT) or artificial urinary sphincters (AUS) used for the treatment of patients suffering from PPI will be included. A systematic search will be conducted using the OVID and PubMED platforms in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases, and reference lists of relevant reviews and guidelines. Trained independent reviewers will conduct study selection and data extraction. Outcomes will include the number of pads used per day, the 24-h pad weight test, the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) and the Incontinence Quality of Life (IQOL) as possible benefits and the reoperations, the Clavien-Dindo complications and the other reported adverse events as the harms. When possible, pooled analyses will be completed. Risk of bias will be assessed using the CLARITY tools and a new tool for the before-and-after studies without a control group. Finally, study heterogeneity will be assessed, publication bias will be evaluated with funnel plots and quality of evidence rated for each outcome. Discussion: Our study will address patient-important outcomes and will be useful in clinical decision-making as well as identifying key elements for future research. Study registration: PROSPERO: CRD42018073923 05/12/2018 F1000 Research Limited 2019-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7689604/ /pubmed/33381297 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.19484.1 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Choiniere R et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Choiniere, Roselyne
Richard, Patrick O.
Morin, Melanie
Tu, Le-Mai
Guyatt, Gordon H.
Violette, Philippe D.
Evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
title Evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
title_full Evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
title_fullStr Evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
title_short Evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
title_sort evaluation of benefits and harms of surgical treatments for post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7689604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33381297
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.19484.1
work_keys_str_mv AT choiniereroselyne evaluationofbenefitsandharmsofsurgicaltreatmentsforpostradicalprostatectomyurinaryincontinenceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol
AT richardpatricko evaluationofbenefitsandharmsofsurgicaltreatmentsforpostradicalprostatectomyurinaryincontinenceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol
AT morinmelanie evaluationofbenefitsandharmsofsurgicaltreatmentsforpostradicalprostatectomyurinaryincontinenceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol
AT tulemai evaluationofbenefitsandharmsofsurgicaltreatmentsforpostradicalprostatectomyurinaryincontinenceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol
AT guyattgordonh evaluationofbenefitsandharmsofsurgicaltreatmentsforpostradicalprostatectomyurinaryincontinenceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol
AT violettephilipped evaluationofbenefitsandharmsofsurgicaltreatmentsforpostradicalprostatectomyurinaryincontinenceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisprotocol