Precise Prediction of Long-Term Urinary Incontinence after Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy by Readily Accessible “Everyday” Diagnostics during Post-Surgical Hospitalization

Le résumé fourni par la source

Aim and Objectives: We aimed to test the predictive value of readily accessible and easily performed post-surgical “bedside tests” on their validity of long-term urinary incontinence (UI) (≥12 months) in patients following robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP). Material and Methods: Patients undergoing RALP between July 2020 and March 2021 were prospectively included and subdivided into two groups based on their pad usage after 12 months (0 vs. ≥1 pad). After catheter removal, patients performed a 1 h pad test, documented the need for pad change in a micturition protocol and received post-voiding residual urine volume ultrasound. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to demonstrate the predictive value of easily accessible tests applied after catheter removal for UI following RALP. Results: Of 109 patients, 47 (43%) had to use at least one pad (vs. 62 (57%) zero pads) after 12 months. Univariate testing showed a significant difference in urine loss between both groups evaluated by the 1 h pad test performed within 24 h after catheter removal (70% < 10 mL, vs. 30% ≥ 10 mL, p = 0.004) and in the need for pad change within the first 24 h after catheter removal (14% dry pads vs. 86% wet pads, p = 0.003). In multivariable analyses, the combination of both tests (synoptical incontinence score) could be confirmed as an independent predictor for UI after 12 months (p = 0.011). Conclusions: Readily accessible “everyday” diagnostics (pad test/change of pads after catheter removal) following RALP seem to be associated with a higher rate of long-term UI. This finding is crucial since patients with a potentially higher need for patient education and counselling can be identified using these readily accessible tests. This could lead to a higher patient satisfaction and improved outcomes.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.