Synthetic sling or artificial urinary sphincter for men with urodynamic stress incontinence after prostate surgery: the MASTER non-inferiority RCT.

BACKGROUND: Stress urinary incontinence is common in men after prostate surgery and can be difficult to improve. Implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter is the most common surgical procedure for persistent stress urinary incontinence, but it requires specialist surgical skills, and revisions may be necessary. In addition, the sphincter is relatively expensive and its operation requires adequate patient dexterity. New surgical approaches include the male synthetic sling, which is emerging as a possible alternative. However, robust comparable data, derived from randomised controlled trials, on the relative safety and efficacy of the male synthetic sling and the artificial urinary sphincter are lacking. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the male synthetic sling with those of the artificial urinary sphincter surgery in men with persistent stress urinary incontinence after prostate surgery. DESIGN: This was a multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial, with a parallel non-randomised cohort and embedded qualitative component. Randomised controlled trial allocation was carried out by remote web-based randomisation (1 : 1), minimised on previous prostate surgery (radical prostatectomy or transurethral resection of the prostate), radiotherapy (or not, in relation to prostate surgery) and centre. Surgeons and participants were not blind to the treatment received. Non-randomised cohort allocation was participant and/or surgeon preference. SETTING: The trial was set in 28 UK urological centres in the NHS. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were men with urodynamic stress incontinence after prostate surgery for whom surgery was deemed appropriate. Exclusion criteria included previous sling or artificial urinary sphincter surgery, unresolved bladder neck contracture or urethral stricture after prostate surgery, and an inability to give informed consent or complete trial documentation. INTERVENTIONS: We compared male synthetic sling with artificial urinary sphincter. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The clinical primary outcome measure was men's reports of continence (assessed from questions 3 and 4 of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form) at 12 months post randomisation (with a non-inferiority margin of 15%). The primary economic outcome was cost-effectiveness (assessed as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year at 24 months post randomisation). RESULTS: In total, 380 men were included in the randomised controlled trial (n = 190 in each group), and 99 out of 100 men were included in the non-randomised cohort. In terms of continence, the male sling was non-inferior to the artificial urinary sphincter (intention-to-treat estimated absolute risk difference -0.034, 95% confidence interval -0.117 to 0.048; non-inferiority p = 0.003), indicating a lower success rate in those randomised to receive a sling, but with a confidence interval excluding the non-inferiority margin of -15%. In both groups, treatment resulted in a reduction in incontinence symptoms (as measured by the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form). Between baseline and 12 months' follow-up, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form score fell from 16.1 to 8.7 in the male sling group and from 16.4 to 7.5 in the artificial urinary sphincter group (mean difference for the time point at 12 months 1.30, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 2.49; p = 0.032). The number of serious adverse events was small (male sling group, n = 8; artificial urinary sphincter group, n = 15; one man in the artificial urinary sphincter group experienced three serious adverse events). Quality-of-life scores improved and satisfaction was high in both groups. Secondary outcomes that showed statistically significant differences favoured the artificial urinary sphincter over the male sling. Outcomes of the non-randomised cohort were similar. The male sling cost less than the artificial sphincter but was associated with a smaller quality-adjusted life-year gain. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for male slings compared with an artificial urinary sphincter suggests that there is a cost saving of £425,870 for each quality-adjusted life-year lost. The probability that slings would be cost-effective at a £30,000 willingness-to-pay threshold for a quality-adjusted life-year was 99%. LIMITATIONS: Follow-up beyond 24 months is not available. More specific surgical/device-related pain outcomes were not included. CONCLUSIONS: Continence rates improved from baseline, with the male sling non-inferior to the artificial urinary sphincter. Symptoms and quality of life significantly improved in both groups. Men were generally satisfied with both procedures. Overall, secondary and post hoc analyses favoured the artificial urinary sphincter over the male sling. FUTURE WORK: Participant reports of any further surgery, satisfaction and quality of life at 5-year follow-up will inform longer-term outcomes. Administration of an additional pain questionnaire would provide further information on pain levels after both surgeries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as ISRCTN49212975. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 36. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Leakage of urine associated with physical exertion (e.g. sporting activities, sneezing or coughing) is common in men who have undergone prostate surgery, but it is difficult to improve. Many men still leak urine 12 months after their prostate surgery and may continue to wear protective pads or sheaths. The most common operation to improve incontinence is implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter. An artificial urinary sphincter is an inflatable cuff that is placed around the urethra, the tube that drains urine from the bladder. The cuff is inflated and compresses the urethra to prevent leaking. When the man needs to pass urine, he must deflate the cuff by squeezing a pump placed in his scrotum, which releases the compression on the urethra and allows the bladder to empty. Recently, a new device, the male sling (made from non-absorbable plastic mesh), has been developed. The sling, which is surgically inserted under the urethra, supports the bladder, but, in contrast to the artificial sphincter, it does not need to be deactivated by a pump and, therefore, the patient does not need to do anything to operate it. A sling is also easier for the surgeon to insert than a sphincter. However, in some men, the sling does not provide enough improvement in incontinence symptoms and another operation, to place an artificial urinary sphincter, is needed. The aim of this study was to determine if the male sling was as effective as the artificial urinary sphincter in treating men with bothersome incontinence after prostate surgery. The study took the form of a randomised controlled trial (the gold standard and most reliable way to compare treatments) in which men were randomised (allocated at random to one of two groups using a computer) to either a male sling or an artificial urinary sphincter operation. We asked men how they got on in the first 2 years after their operation. Regardless of which operation they had, incontinence and quality of life significantly improved and complications were rare. A small number of men did require another operation to improve their incontinence, and it was more likely that an artificial urinary sphincter was needed, rather than another sling operation, if a male sling was not successful. Satisfaction was high in both groups, but it was significantly higher in the artificial urinary sphincter group than in the male sling group. Those who received a male sling were less likely than those who received an artificial urinary sphincter to say that they would recommend their surgery to a friend.

Efficacy and Safety of AbobotulinumtoxinA in Patients with Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity Incontinence Performing Regular Clean Intermittent Catheterization: Pooled Results from Two Phase 3 Randomized Studies (CONTENT1 and CONTENT2).

BACKGROUND: For patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity incontinence (NDOI), treatment with oral medications is often unsatisfactory. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of abobotulinumtoxinA (aboBoNT-A) for NDOI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Two randomized, double-blind phase 3 studies (CONTENT1, NCT02660138; CONTENT2, NCT02660359) enrolled patients with NDOI who were regularly performing clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) and were inadequately managed with oral therapy. Pooled results from the first placebo-controlled treatment cycle are reported. INTERVENTION: Patients received injections of aboBoNT-A 600 U (n = 162) or 800 U (n = 161) or placebo (n = 162) into the detrusor muscle. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was the mean change from baseline in NDOI episodes per week at week 6. Secondary endpoints reported are the proportion of patients with no NDOI episodes, the volume per void, urodynamic parameters, and quality of life (QoL). Safety was also assessed. Statistical analyses were conducted for the pooled study populations (each aboBoNT-A dose vs placebo). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: At week 6, NDOI episodes per week were significantly reduced in each aboBoNT-A group versus placebo (both p < 0.001) and the volume per void had significantly increased. Approximately one-third of patients in each aboBoNT-A dose group reported no NDOI episodes versus 3% of patients in the placebo group. Reductions in urinary incontinence (UI) were reflected in significantly greater improvements in UI-related QoL in the aboBoNT-A groups versus placebo. Urodynamic parameters (bladder capacity and detrusor pressure) were significantly improved with each aboBoNT-A dose versus placebo. Each aboBoNT-A dose was well tolerated. Symptomatic urinary tract infection was the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event, with incidence comparable across the aboBoNT-A and placebo groups. The studies were terminated prematurely owing to slow recruitment and were not designed for statistical comparison between the two aboBoNT-A doses. CONCLUSIONS: Intradetrusor aboBoNT-A is an effective treatment and alternative option for patients with NDOI who have an inadequate response to oral anticholinergics and are already performing CIC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In patients with bladder muscle overactivity caused by neurological conditions (multiple sclerosis or spinal cord injury) and resulting in urinary incontinence, abobotulinumtoxinA injections improved their symptoms and bladder function, with no unexpected effects.

Thulium laser transurethral vaporesection versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic obstruction: the UNBLOCS RCT.

BACKGROUND: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the standard operation for benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate (ThuVARP) vaporises and resects the prostate using a technique similar to TURP. The small amount of existing literature suggests that there may be potential advantages of ThuVARP over TURP. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether or not the outcomes from ThuVARP are equivalent to the outcomes from TURP in men with BPO treated in the NHS. DESIGN: A multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled parallel-group trial, with an embedded qualitative study and economic evaluation. SETTING: Seven UK centres - four university teaching hospitals and three district general hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Men aged ≥ 18 years who were suitable to undergo TURP, presenting with bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) or urinary retention secondary to BPO. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomised 1 : 1 to receive TURP or ThuVARP and remained blinded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two co-primary outcomes - patient-reported International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and clinical measure of maximum urine flow rate (Qmax) at 12 months post surgery. RESULTS: In total, 410 men were randomised, 205 to each arm. The two procedures were equivalent in terms of IPSS [adjusted mean difference 0.28 points higher for ThuVARP (favouring TURP), 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.92 to 1.49 points]. The two procedures were not equivalent in terms of Qmax (adjusted mean difference 3.12 ml/second in favour of TURP, 95% CI 0.45 to 5.79 ml/second), with TURP deemed superior. Surgical outcomes, such as complications and blood transfusion rates, and hospital stay were similar for both procedures. Patient-reported urinary and sexual symptoms were also similar between the arms. Qualitative interviews indicated similar patient experiences with both procedures. However, 25% of participants in the ThuVARP arm did not undergo their randomised allocation, compared with 2% of participants in the TURP arm. Prostate cancer was also detected less frequently from routine histology after ThuVARP (65% lower odds of detection) in an exploratory analysis. The adjusted mean differences between the arms were similar for secondary care NHS costs (£9 higher for ThuVARP, 95% CI -£359 to £376) and quality-adjusted life-years (0.01 favouring TURP, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.01). LIMITATIONS: Complications were recorded in prespecified categories; those not prespecified were excluded owing to variable reporting. Preoperative Qmax and IPSS data could not be collected for participants with indwelling catheters, making adjustment for baseline status difficult. CONCLUSIONS: TURP was superior to ThuVARP in terms of Qmax, although both operations resulted in a Qmax considered clinically successful. ThuVARP also potentially resulted in lower detection rates of prostate cancer as a result of the smaller volume of tissue available for histology. Length of hospital stay after ThuVARP, anticipated to be a key benefit, was equal to that after TURP in this trial. Overall, both ThuVARP and TURP were effective procedures for BPO, with minor benefits in favour of TURP. Therefore, the results suggest that it may be appropriate that new treatment alternatives continue to be compared with TURP. FUTURE WORK: Longer-term follow-up to assess reoperation rates over time, and research into the comparative effectiveness of ThuVARP and TURP in large prostates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN00788389. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 41. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

An enlarged prostate can make it difficult, or even impossible, for a man to pass urine by blocking the urine flow from the bladder. This can cause significant problems, and 25,000 men in the UK each year are treated with an operation to relieve their symptoms. The standard operation [transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)], which uses electricity to shave off the enlarged prostate, is successful, but it can have some complications. There is some evidence to suggest that laser surgery can lead to less blood loss and a shorter stay in hospital, but laser operations can be difficult for surgeons to carry out. This trial has looked at a procedure using a new type of laser called thulium, which uses a very similar surgical technique to TURP and has shown promising results so far. A total of 410 men needing a prostate operation received either TURP or a laser operation. Participants were unaware of which operation they received until the end of the study to ensure a fair comparison. Seven hospitals across the UK were involved over 4 years. The trial mainly assessed the benefits of the operations using a urinary symptom questionnaire completed by participants, and by measuring the speed of passing urine after surgery. Overall, both procedures achieved positive results, and participants expressed high levels of satisfaction with the outcomes. Participants who had either operation reported a similar improvement in urinary symptoms in their questionnaires. However, although both operations did a good job of improving the speed of passing urine, TURP was better. Participants experienced few complications, and the complications that did occur were similar after both operations, including levels of bleeding and time spent in hospital. The cost of the two operations to the NHS was also similar. Overall, we concluded that both operations are suitable for patients with prostate enlargement, with TURP showing some minor additional benefits.

Thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate for men with lower urinary tract symptoms or urinary retention (UNBLOCS): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the standard operation for benign prostatic obstruction. Thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate (ThuVARP) is a technique with suggested advantages over TURP, including reduced complications and hospital stay. We aimed to investigate TURP versus ThuVARP in men with lower urinary tract symptoms or urinary retention secondary to benign prostatic obstruction. METHODS: In this randomised, blinded, parallel-group, pragmatic equivalence trial, men in seven UK hospitals with bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms or urinary retention secondary to benign prostatic obstruction were randomly assigned (1:1) at the point of surgery to receive ThuVARP or TURP. Patients were masked until follow-up completion. Centres used their usual TURP procedure (monopolar or bipolar). All trial surgeons underwent training on the ThuVARP technique. Co-primary outcomes were maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at 12-months post-surgery. Equivalence was defined as a difference of 2·5 points or less for IPSS and 4 mL per s or less for Qmax. Analysis was done according to the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN00788389. FINDINGS: Between July 23, 2014, and Dec 30, 2016, 410 men were randomly assigned to ThuVARP or TURP, 205 per study group. TURP was superior for Qmax (mean 23·2 mL per s for TURP and 20·2 mL per s for ThuVARP; adjusted difference in means -3·12, 95% CI -5·79 to -0·45). Equivalence was shown for IPSS (mean 6·3 for TURP and 6·4 for ThuVARP; adjusted difference in means 0·28, -0·92 to 1·49). Mean hospital stay was 48 h in both study groups. 91 (45%) of 204 patients in the TURP group and 96 (47%) of 203 patients in the ThuVARP group had at least one complication. INTERPRETATION: TURP and ThuVARP were equivalent for urinary symptom improvement (IPSS) 12-months post-surgery, and TURP was superior for Qmax. Anticipated laser benefits for ThuVARP of reduced hospital stay and complications were not observed. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

The cost-effectiveness of transurethral resection of the prostate vs thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate in the UNBLOCS randomised controlled trial for benign prostatic obstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of the current 'gold standard' operation of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) compared to the new laser technique of thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate (ThuVARP) in men with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) within the UK National Health Service (NHS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The trial was conducted across seven UK centres (four university teaching hospitals and three district general hospitals). A total of 410 men aged ≥18 years presenting with either bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) or urinary retention secondary to BPO, and suitable for surgery, were randomised (whilst under anaesthetic) 1:1 to receive the TURP or ThuVARP procedure. Resource use in relation to the operation, initial inpatient stay, and subsequent use of NHS services was collected for 12 months from randomisation (equivalent to primary effectiveness outcome) using hospital records and patient questionnaires. Resources were valued using UK reference costs. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated from the EuroQoL five Dimensions five Levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire completed at baseline, 3- and 12-months. Total adjusted mean costs, QALYs and incremental Net Monetary Benefit statistics were calculated: cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty. RESULTS: The total adjusted mean secondary care cost over the 12 months in the TURP arm (£4244) was £9 (95% CI -£376, £359) lower than the ThuVARP arm (£4253). The ThuVARP operation took on average 21 min longer than TURP. The adjusted mean difference of QALYs (0.01 favouring TURP, 95% CI -0.01, 0.04) was similar between the arms. There is a 76% probability that TURP is the cost-effective option compared with ThuVARP at the £20 000 per QALY willingness to pay threshold used by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). CONCLUSION: One of the anticipated benefits of the laser surgery, reduced length of hospital stay with an associated reduction in cost, did not materialise within the study. The longer duration of the ThuVARP procedure is important to consider, both from a patient perspective in terms of increased time under anaesthetic, and from a service delivery perspective. TURP remains a highly cost-effective treatment for men with BPO.

Impact of food and drinks on urine production: A systematic review.

CONTEXT: The impact of food and drinks on body fluid metabolism is of direct clinical relevance but current evidence remains fragmented. AIM: Synthesise current evidence on the role of food and drinks in urine production. METHODS: Systematic review as per PRISMA guidelines using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (completed October 2019). Studies reporting on the effect of food, food constituents, and drinks on urine production were included. Two authors performed an independent extraction of relevant articles using predetermined data sets and completed quality-of-study indicators. RESULTS: A total of 49 studies were included, of which 21 enroled human subjects, and 28 were clinically relevant animal studies (all of which utilised rodent models). The included studies were determined to be of variable quality. High dietary sodium, as well as wine, spirits, high-caffeine coffee, and caffeinated energy drinks, increased urine production in human studies. Decreased urine production was associated with low dietary sodium and consumption of milk, orange juice, and high-salt/high-sugar drinks. In animal models, a variety of fruits, vegetables, herbs, spices, and honey were associated with increased urine production. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that although several types of food and drinks may impact body fluid metabolism, the quality of the data is variable. Urine production appears to be influenced by multiple factors including composition (ie, moisture, macronutrients, and electrolytes), metabolite load, and the presence of specific diuresis-promoting substances (eg, caffeine, alcohol) and other bioactive phytochemicals. Future research is needed to support current evidence and the physiologic mechanisms underlying these findings.

Can we improve our management of dysfunctional voiding in children and adults: International Consultation on Incontinence Research Society; ICI-RS2018?

AIMS: Dysfunctional voiding (DV) remains a poorly understood and a poorly managed problem, both in children and adults. The Think Tank (TT) discussed how to improve the management of DV in these two different age groups and in transitional care. METHODS: During the 2018 International Consultation on Incontinence Research Society held in Bristol, a multidisciplinary TT on DV was created. The presentations and subsequent discussion, leading to research recommendations intended to improve the management of DV in children and adults are summarized. RESULTS: To improve the management of DV in children and adults, the TT panel proposed: (1) to conduct reliable prevalence studies of DV; (2) to perform longitudinal studies to prospectively test the sequence hypothesis by answering the following questions: (a) Which, if any children show a progression from overactive bladder or voiding postponement to DV?; (b) Which children develop each disorder without precursors?; and (c) Is there a continuation of DV from childhood to adulthood, or are adult cases new-onset presentations?; (3) to obtain detailed information regarding psychopathology to understand which comorbid psychological disorders prevail and at which rate, in those suffering DV; (4) to develop and validate diagnostic tools specifically for DV; (5) to better establish urodynamic correlates of DV specific for different age groups; and (6) to generate prospective long-term data regarding the efficacy of different treatment options and management strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The future research recommendations of this TT may improve our management of DV in children and adults.

Male synthetic sling versus artificial urinary sphincter trial for men with urodynamic stress incontinence after prostate surgery (MASTER): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a frequent adverse effect for men undergoing prostate surgery. A large proportion (around 8% after radical prostatectomy and 2% after transurethral resection of prostate (TURP)) are left with severe disabling incontinence which adversely effects their quality of life and many are reliant on containment measures such as pads (27% and 6% respectively). Surgery is currently the only option for active management of the problem. The overwhelming majority of surgeries for persistent bothersome SUI involve artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) insertion. However, this is expensive, and necessitates manipulation of a pump to enable voiding. More recently, an alternative to AUS has been developed - a synthetic sling for men which elevates the urethra, thus treating SUI. This is thought, by some, to be less invasive, more acceptable and less expensive than AUS but clear evidence for this is lacking. The MASTER trial aims to determine whether the male synthetic sling is non-inferior to implantation of the AUS for men who have SUI after prostate surgery (for cancer or benign disease), judged primarily on clinical effectiveness but also considering relative harms and cost-effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: Men with urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) after prostate surgery, for whom surgery is judged appropriate, are the target population. We aim to recruit men from secondary care urological centres in the UK NHS who carry out surgery for post-prostatectomy incontinence. Outcomes will be assessed by participant-completed questionnaires and 3-day urinary bladder diaries at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months. The 24-h urinary pad test will be used at baseline as an objective assessment of urine loss. Clinical data will be completed at the time of surgery to provide details of the operative procedures, complications and resource use in hospital. At 12 months, men will also have a clinical review to evaluate the results of surgery (including another 24-h pad test) and to identify problems or need for further treatment. DISCUSSION: A robust examination of the comparative effectiveness of the male synthetic sling will provide high-quality evidence to determine whether or not it should be adopted widely in the NHS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Registry: Number ISRCTN49212975 . Registered on 22 July 2013. First patient randomised on 29 January 2014.

A randomised controlled trial to determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate (ThuVARP) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the National Health Service (NHS) - the UNBLOCS trial: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has been the standard operation for benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) for 40 years, with approximately 25,000 procedures performed annually, and has remained largely unchanged. It is generally a successful operation, but has well-documented risks for the patient. Thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate (ThuVARP) vaporises and resects the prostate using a surgical technique similar to TURP. The small amount of study data currently available suggests that ThuVARP may have certain advantages over TURP, including reduced blood loss and shorter hospital stay, earlier return to normal activities, and shorter duration of catheterisation. DESIGN: A multicentre, pragmatic, randomised, controlled, parallel-group trial of ThuVARP versus standard TURP in men with BPO. Four hundred and ten men suitable for prostate surgery were randomised to receive either ThuVARP or TURP at four university teaching hospitals, and three district general hospitals. The key aim of the trial is to determine whether ThuVARP is equivalent to TURP judged on both the patient-reported International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the maximum urine flow rate (Qmax) at 12 months post-surgery. DISCUSSION: The general population has an increased life expectancy. As men get older their prostates enlarge, potentially causing BPO, which often requires surgery. Therefore, as the population ages, more prostate operations are needed to relieve obstruction. There is hence sustained interest in the condition and increasing need to find safer techniques than TURP. Various laser techniques have become available but none are widely used in the NHS because of lengthy training required for surgeons or inferior performance on clinical outcomes. Promising initial evidence from one RCT shows that ThuVARP has equivalent clinical effectiveness when compared to TURP, as well as other potential advantages. As ThuVARP uses a technique similar to that used in TURP, the learning curve is short, potentially making it also very quickly generalisable. This randomised study is designed to provide the high-quality evidence, in an NHS setting, with a range of patient-reported, clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes, which will underpin and inform future NICE guidance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN00788389 . Registered on 20 September 2013.

Prostate cancer - evidence of exercise and nutrition trial (PrEvENT): study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: A growing body of observational evidence suggests that nutritional and physical activity interventions are associated with beneficial outcomes for men with prostate cancer, including brisk walking, lycopene intake, increased fruit and vegetable intake and reduced dairy consumption. However, randomised controlled trial data are limited. The 'Prostate Cancer: Evidence of Exercise and Nutrition Trial' investigates the feasibility of recruiting and randomising men diagnosed with localised prostate cancer and eligible for radical prostatectomy to interventions that modify nutrition and physical activity. The primary outcomes are randomisation rates and adherence to the interventions at 6 months following randomisation. The secondary outcomes are intervention tolerability, trial retention, change in prostate specific antigen level, change in diet, change in general physical activity levels, insulin-like growth factor levels, and a range of related outcomes, including quality of life measures. METHODS/DESIGN: The trial is factorial, randomising men to both a physical activity (brisk walking or control) and nutritional (lycopene supplementation or increased fruit and vegetables with reduced dairy consumption or control) intervention. The trial has two phases: men are enrolled into a cohort study prior to radical prostatectomy, and then consented after radical prostatectomy into a randomised controlled trial. Data are collected at four time points (cohort baseline, true trial baseline and 3 and 6 months post-randomisation). DISCUSSION: The Prostate Cancer: Evidence of Exercise and Nutrition Trial aims to determine whether men with localised prostate cancer who are scheduled for radical prostatectomy can be recruited into a cohort and subsequently randomised to a 6-month nutrition and physical activity intervention trial. If successful, this feasibility trial will inform a larger trial to investigate whether this population will gain clinical benefit from long-term nutritional and physical activity interventions post-surgery. Prostate Cancer: Evidence of Exercise and Nutrition Trial (PrEvENT) is registered on the ISRCTN registry, ref number ISRCTN99048944. Date of registration 17 November 2014.

Developing and validating the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire bladder diary.

BACKGROUND: Despite the common use of urinary diaries to assess lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), a standardised validated diary does not exist. OBJECTIVE: To develop a validated urinary diary, using the psychometric validation protocol used in previous International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ) modules. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We invited 400 consecutive patients attending the urology department for assessment of LUTS to complete a urinary diary (developed and validated for content in a previous study), and the ICIQ Male or Female LUTS questionnaire. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: To establish construct validity, the urinary diary was compared with known theories from published literature; to establish criterion validity, the diary was compared with questionnaire responses and/or urodynamic observations. Optimal diary duration was tested by comparing the 4-d diary against shorter durations. Patients completed a second diary after 2-3 wk for test-retest analysis, and a subset receiving sacral nerve stimulation completed the diary before and after treatment for analysis of responsiveness. A variety of statistical tests were used for different stages of the study. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The urinary diaries and ICIQ LUTS questionnaires were completed by 264 patients. Construct validity was established for two of three tested hypotheses. Criterion testing showed good agreement between questionnaire and diary recordings of nocturia (κ=0.653; p<0.001; 92.2%) and incontinence (κ=0.351; p<0.001; 64.5%), whereas good agreement (κ=0.378; p<0.001; 69.2%) was observed between urodynamically proven incontinence and diary reports (n=104). Diary recordings of urgency showed weak agreement with questionnaire responses (κ=-0.215; p<0.001; 36%) and urodynamic observations (κ=-0.105; p=0.256; 43.7%). The 3-d diary explained at least 94% of the total variance of the 4-d diary. A second diary for test-retest analysis was returned by 59 patients, demonstrating fair to excellent agreement (Spearman correlations: 0.49-0.88). Pre- and post-treatment analysis, on pilot testing, showed that the diary is responsive to change. CONCLUSIONS: Using the ICIQ psychometric validation methodology, a bladder diary was developed for the assessment of LUTS and shown to be valid, reliable, and responsive to change. The 3-d diary has been accepted as the ICIQ bladder diary. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, patients and clinicians developed and tested a diary in which patients can record their urinary symptoms. The resulting 3-d diary is called the ICIQ bladder diary and is available for adult men and women with urinary symptoms.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of solifenacin versus oxybutynin immediate-release in the treatment of patients with overactive bladder in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: To carry out a cost-utility analysis comparing initial treatment with solifenacin 5 mg/day vs oxybutynin immediate-release (IR) 15 mg/day for the treatment of patients with overactive bladder (OAB) from the perspective of the U.K. National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: A Markov model with six health states was developed to follow a cohort of OAB patients treated with either solifenacin or oxybutynin during a 1-year period. Costs and utilities were accumulated as patients transited through the health states in the model and a drop-out state. Some of the solifenacin patients were titrated from 5 mg to 10 mg/day at 8 weeks. A proportion of drop-out patients were assumed to continue treatment with tolterodine ER. Utility values were obtained from a Swedish study and pad use was based on a multinational clinical trial. Adherence rates for individual treatments were derived from a U.K. database study. For pad use and utility values, the drop-out state was split between those patients who were no longer receiving treatment and those on second-line therapy. Patients on second-line therapy who drop-out were referred for a specialist visit. Results were expressed in terms of incremental cost-utility ratios. RESULTS: Total annual costs for solifenacin and oxybutynin were £504.30 and £364.19, respectively. First-line drug use represents 49% and 4% of costs and pad use represent 23% and 40% of costs for solifenacin and oxybutynin, respectively. Differences between cumulative utilities were small but were greater for solifenacin (0.7020 vs. 0.6907). The baseline incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £12,309/QALY. CONCLUSION: Under the baseline assumptions, solifenacin would appear to be cost-effective with an incremental cost-utility of less than £20,000/QALY. However, small differences in utility between the alternatives and the large number of drop-outs means that the results are sensitive to small adjustments in the values of utilities assigned to the drop-out state.

New therapies in the treatment of overactive bladder.

INTRODUCTION: Overactive bladder (OAB) is a common condition which affects both men and women across many age groups with significant impact on quality of life. There is currently an armamentarium of treatment options available ranging from conservative, medical therapy to radical surgeries. Increasing understanding of OAB is resulting in the rapid development of new therapies today. AREAS COVERED: The purpose of this article was to summarise the latest developments in non-neurogenic OAB treatment, discuss the evidence and results of current and new treatment modalities available through review of published data and results presented at recent international meetings. EXPERT OPINION: The ultimate goal in OAB therapy is to provide good clinical efficacy, safe, non-invasive and easy to administer. There is definitely room for development of new therapies in OAB and current progress is encouraging.

What are the causes and consequences of bladder overdistension? ICI-RS 2011.

AIMS: To report the outcome of the think tank on prolonged bladder overdistension from the 3rd ICI-RS meeting. METHODS: Prolonged bladder overdistension was discussed after acute urinary retention, its terminology, its prevalence, pathophysiology, and consequences, as well as prophylactic and therapeutic aspects. RESULTS: Acute prolonged bladder overdistension (ApBO) is a consequence of undetected or inadequately treated acute retention, and is mostly due to regional anesthesia, prolonged childbirth, or extensive surgery. Currently, there is no agreed terminology. A primary, temporary neurogenic detrusor dysfunction causing retention is associated with decreased or absent bladder sensation therefore patients do not complain, and management is delayed. Therapeutically, the first intervention is to drain the bladder. Recovery depends on whether reversible or irreversible damage has occurred. There are no good data to support the use of drugs or sacral neuromodulation. Intravesical electrostimulation is the only treatment that has specifically addressed this problem with encouraging results. There are no recent reports on the effect of surgery for myogenic bladder damage. CONCLUSION: ApBO is an important, but often unrecognized medical complication. There is a need for defining the terminology, for studies to record the incidence of different types of bladder overdistension, and to establish management strategies. Apart from clean intermittent self catheterization (CIC) there are no data justifying pharmacological or other therapies. Therefore, prevention is of paramount importance and there is a need to develop and test preventative strategies, which should then be incorporated in surgical registries.

How does neuromodulation work.

Although sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is approved and successfully used for different urological and proctologic functional diseases for the long-term treatment, less is known about the working mechanisms underlying SNM. This review highlights SNM clinical application, the current data of LUT neuroanatomy and neurophysiology, SNM techniques and its prospective working mechanisms. Functional imaging techniques have facilitated a more detailed insight into the neural network between the central nervous system (CNS) and the lower urinary tract (LUT). In addition to the well-known factors of the spinal micturition pathway, several pontine (e.g. pontine micturition centre) and suprapontine (e.g. cingulate cortex) regions and their interactions have been identified. An attribution of CNS activity levels to different LUT conditions is possible for the first time. Based on this information, different SNM actions could also have been allocated to different ascending/descending pathways and supraspinal regions, whereas acute SNM especially affects regions of learning activity, chronic SNM might result in CNS plasticity even though clinical effectiveness fades after SNM deactivation. Studies to treat fecal incontinence or to prevent detrusor overactivity in complete spinal cord injured patients support the importance of sympathetic pathways for the action of SNM. Despite increasing knowledge about SNM influence on the CNS, the complexity of its underlying working mechanisms is not understood at all. Further investigations with improved functional imaging techniques will enhance our SNM background.

Desmopressin, as a "designer-drug," in the treatment of overactive bladder syndrome.

AIMS: This study looked at whether oral desmopressin, by decreasing kidney urine production, would prolong bladder filling-time thereby increasing the time to reach maximum capacity, thus reducing overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms, and providing an alternative method of treatment to OAB sufferers. METHODS: An investigator-initiated, 2-week, multi-national, multi-centre, "proof-of-concept," phase IIb, double-blind, placebo-controlled, prospective, randomized, cross-over study was conducted using 0.2 mg of oral desmopressin in adults suffering with OAB. Patients were included in the trial period if they had >or=4 voids in the first 8-hr of the day after rising, excluding the first morning void. The primary endpoint was evaluation of effectiveness of desmopressin in increasing the time to the first OAB symptom episodes during the first 8-hr following treatment. RESULTS: Time to first void was 8-min later on the drug than on placebo (P = 0.27). However, the drug led to one less void (3.2 vs. 4.2) in the same period (P < 0.001). There was an increase in the time to first urgency episode with a decrease in the number of urgency episodes in the drug days compared to placebo (P < 0.003). There was a subjective improvement in frequency and urgency and overall quality-of-life as measured by the ICIQ-OAB. Twenty-seven people reported adverse events which were all mild, headache being the commonest and no hyponatremia was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Antidiuresis, using oral desmopressin tablets, is a novel, feasible and safe (short-term basis) method of treatment for adults with OAB, and could be considered in the armamentarium of drugs available for the treatment of OAB.

Persistent detrusor overactivity after transurethral resection of the prostate.

Detrusor overactivity is associated with aging and benign prostatic obstruction and often causes the troublesome symptoms of urgency and urgency incontinence (overactive bladder), persistent detrusor overactivity after transurethral resection of the prostate being the cause of more than a third of poor symptomatic outcomes following surgery. Most of the evidence currently suggests that neurons of the urothelium at the bladder neck play a significant role in the genesis of detrusor overactivity. Treatment options including botulinum toxin injections and intravesical vanilloids have been studied in the treatment of persistent detrusor overactivity, but further studies are needed specifically in patients with persistent detrusor overactivity after transurethral resection of the prostate. As urodynamic studies are able to predict a proportion of postoperative failures, more widespread use is advocated by many in the routine assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms thought to be due to benign prostatic obstruction.

A proposed guideline for the urological management of patients with spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a guideline for the urological management of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: The existing practice in the UK was evaluated by a series of expert meetings. Previous publications on the subject were evaluated, and the information synthesized to produce a proposed guideline. RESULTS: The literature review showed limited good-quality data. As a result of the process a series of research questions was produced, the answers to which would allow a guideline to be established based on good-quality evidence. In the absence of high-quality evidence, the guideline was constructed using expert opinion. Urological care is described in the immediate, intermediate and long-term phases after SCI. CONCLUSION: The urological consequences of SCI can be devastating. Urological care is an important part of the holistic care of these patients, and should be delivered from SCI centres through a network of qualified clinicians.

Management of the overactive bladder: a review of pharmacological therapies and methods used by the urological specialist.

Overactive bladder is a common urological diagnosis, which is often untreated as patients fail to seek help for this embarrassing problem. This disorder causes significant lifestyle limitations for the patient and is also expensive as it reduces national productivity and therefore affected patients should be treated. It is simple for primary care providers to make a working diagnosis in this disorder and they should be carrying out simple investigations in order to make the diagnosis. Commencement of therapy should start with conservative measures such as lifestyle modifications including pelvic floor exercises and bladder drill followed by the introduction of pharmacological treatments if necessary. The patient should be fully educated about their disorder and about the potential side effects of the medication they are given in order to improve compliance. There are a number of antimuscarinics available on the market for the treatment of overactive bladder but it is often difficult to decide which is the best form of management for these patients. In this review we address the necessary investigations that need to be carried out as well as providing an overview of the different non-surgical and medical treatments for this common problem. Should these therapies fail, then the referral to a urological specialist should be made prior to invasive therapy.