Management of the Devastated Bladder Outlet after Prostate CANCER Treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Devastating complications of the bladder outlet resulting from prostate cancer treatments are relatively uncommon. However, the combination of the high incidence of prostate cancer and patient longevity after treatment have raised awareness of adverse outcomes deteriorating patients' quality of life. This narrative review discusses the diagnostic work-up and management options for bladder outlet obstruction resulting from prostate cancer treatments, including those that require urinary diversion. RECENT FINDINGS: The devastated bladder outlet can be a consequence of the treatment of benign conditions, but more frequently from complications of pelvic cancer treatments. Regardless of etiology, the initial treatment ladder involves endoluminal options such as dilation and direct vision internal urethrotomy, with or without intralesional injection of anti-fibrotic agents. If these conservative strategies fail, surgical reconstruction should be considered. Although surgical reconstruction provides the best prospect of durable success, reconstructive procedures are also associated with serious complications. In the worst circumstances, such as prior radiotherapy, failed reconstruction, devastated bladder outlet with end-stage bladders, or patient's severe comorbidities, reconstruction may neither be realistic nor justified. Urinary diversion with or without cystectomy may be the best option for these patients. Thorough patient counseling before treatment selection is of utmost importance. Outcomes and repercussions on quality of life vary extensively with management options. Meticulous preoperative diagnostic evaluation is paramount in selecting the right treatment strategy for each individual patient. The risk of bladder outlet obstruction, and its severest form, devastated bladder outlet, after treatment of prostate cancer is not negligible, especially following radiation. Management includes endoluminal treatment, open or robot-assisted laparoscopic reconstruction, and urinary diversion in the worst circumstances, with varying success rates.

AdVance™ male sling for stress urinary incontinence: Long-term follow-up and patient satisfaction.

Objectives: To evaluate long-term effects, complications and satisfaction among patients treated with AdVance™ and AdVance™ XP slings (AS) at a Norwegian specialist care hospital. Materials and Methods: Patients who had an AS implanted due to stress urinary incontinence (SUI) 2009-2016 were identified retrospectively. Demographic and perioperative data were extracted from electronic patient files. We did a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) survey with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) urinary domain and a Satisfaction Questionnaire (SQ) 2018-2020. Cure was defined as use of ≤1 pad/day. Results: The AS was implanted in 165 patients, mainly due to mild to moderate SUI (median leakage 112 g, range 13-589 g/24 h). Preoperative urodynamics showed mild detrusor overactivity (DO) in 11 patients. At 6-week follow-up, 148 patients (90%) were cured. The most common complication was urinary retention (N = 38), transient in 32 patients (range 1-42 days). Two patients were later operated with division of the sling due to persistent retention. During clinical follow-up of up to 12 years, 27 patients were reoperated due to persistent/recurrent incontinence. The PROM survey was sent to 125 patients and 115 (92%) replied at median 73 (20-134) months postoperatively. Ninety-one (79%) used ≤1 pads/day, 97 (85%) were satisfied, one patient-reported pain. Regression analyses showed that failure (>1 pad/day) was significantly associated with a higher amount of leakage preoperatively and at the 6-week follow-up. Total cure rate in the complete cohort was 64% at median 73 (20-134) months follow-up. Conclusions: The AS shows good and persistent long-term results in patients with mild to moderate SUI. The only identified risk factor for long-term failure was higher amount of leakage preoperatively. The incidence of high body mass index (BMI), DO and previous radiotherapy was low and not significantly associated with failure but is still considered risk factors.

Management of functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy in the Nordic countries: A survey of uro-oncological centers.

We aimed to describe the clinical practice regarding erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy in the Nordic countries. A 37-item survey about pre- and post-prostatectomy evaluation and rehabilitation of sexual and urinary function was sent to 42 uro-oncology centers. Reporting was done according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). Twenty-seven centers in Denmark (n = 6), Norway (n = 8), Finland (n = 7), and Sweden (n = 6) responded (64.3%). Post-prostatectomy sexual function was evaluated by 25 centers. The majority used validated questionnaires with significant variations across centers. Post-prostatectomy urinary function was evaluated by 24 centers. Again, the majority used validated questionnaires, while 9 centers used objective measures including uroflowmetry, residual urine volume, and pad usage. Twenty-one centers offered sexual rehabilitation and 12 of these described their protocols. All centers administered phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors and seven centers offered further treatment options. Two centers offered a consultation with a sexologist. Twenty-three centers provided pelvic floor muscle training and one center used medical support with duloxetine. Our study indicates a need for standardized evaluation and management of erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy. Especially, there is a need for an increased focus on comprehensive sexual rehabilitation.

To Transect or Not Transect: Results from the Scandinavian Urethroplasty Study, A Multicentre Randomised Study of Bulbar Urethroplasty Comparing Excision and Primary Anastomosis Versus Buccal Mucosal Grafting.

BACKGROUND: Open surgical treatment of short bulbar urethral strictures (urethroplasty) is commonly performed as transecting excision and primary anastomosis (tEPA) or buccal mucosa grafting (BMG). Erectile dysfunction and penile complications have been reported, but there is an absence of randomised trials. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sexual dysfunction and penile complications after urethroplasty with tEPA versus BMG. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Centres in Finland, Sweden and Norway participated. Patients with a bulbar urethral stricture of ≤2 cm without previous urethroplasty were randomised. The primary endpoints were the degree of erectile dysfunction and penile complications. Follow-up was 12 mo. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomised to either tEPA or BMG urethroplasty. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Sexual dysfunction was measured using the International Index of Erectile Function, 5-item version (IIEF-5) and a penile complications questionnaire (PCQ) designed for this study. Continuous data were analysed using analysis of covariance and categorical data were compared using a χ2 test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 151 patients were randomised to either tEPA (n = 75) or BMG (n = 76). The tEPA group reported more penile complications (p = 0.02), especially reduced glans filling (p = 0.03) and a shortened penis (p = 0.001). There were no differences in postoperative IIEF-5 total scores. Recurrence rates were similar in both groups (12.9%) but the study was not designed to detect differences in recurrence rates. The PCQ is not validated, which is a limitation. CONCLUSIONS: More patients reported penile complications after urethroplasty with tEPA than with BMG. This should be considered when choosing the operative method, and patients should be informed accordingly. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study compared two common operations for repair of narrowing of the male urethra. Neither of the two methods seems to cause worsened erections. However, penile problems are more common after the transection technique than after the grafting technique.

Devastated Bladder Outlet in Pelvic Cancer Survivors: Issues on Surgical Reconstruction and Quality of Life.

Bladder outlet obstruction following treatment of pelvic cancer, predominantly prostate cancer, occurs in 1-8% of patients. The high incidence of prostate cancer combined with the long-life expectancy after treatment has increased concerns with cancer survivorship care. However, despite increased oncological cure rates, these adverse events do occur, compromising patients' quality of life. Non-traumatic obstruction of the posterior urethra and bladder neck include membranous and prostatic urethral stenosis and bladder neck stenosis (also known as contracture). The devastated bladder outlet can result from benign conditions, such as neurogenic dysfunction, trauma, iatrogenic causes, or more frequently from complications of oncologic treatment, such as prostate, bladder and rectum. Most posterior urethral stenoses may respond to endoluminal treatments such as dilatation, direct vision internal urethrotomy, and occasionally urethral stents. Although surgical reconstruction offers the best chance of durable success, these reconstructive options are fraught with severe complications and, therefore, are far from being ideal. In patients with prior RT, failed reconstruction, densely fibrotic and/or necrotic and calcified posterior urethra, refractory incontinence or severe comorbidities, reconstruction may not be either feasible or recommended. In these cases, urinary diversion with or without cystectomy is usually required. This review aims to discuss the diagnostic evaluation and treatment options for patients with bladder outlet obstruction with a special emphasis on patients unsuitable for reconstruction of the posterior urethra and requiring urinary diversion.

Modern treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. / Moderne behandling av prostatakreft med fjernmetastaser.

The treatment of prostate cancer with remote metastases has advanced greatly in recent years. Treatment options are dependent on the extent of the metastases, the patient's general condition and wishes, and the treatment response. We present an overview of the latest options for systemic treatment of patients with metastatic prostate cancer, based on availability in Norway.

Severe postprostatectomy incontinence: Is there an association between preoperative urodynamic findings and outcome of incontinence surgery?

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated urodynamic findings in prostate cancer patients with self-reported persistent severe postprostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPI) as well as the outcome of incontinence surgery. The main aim was to evaluate the ability of preoperative urodynamic dysfunctions to predict the outcome of incontinence surgery. The hypothesis was that preoperative bladder dysfunction was predictive of an unsuccessful surgical outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on patient-reported adverse effects after radical prostatectomy (RP) in 2005-2009, 94 men with persistent severe PPI were invited in 2011 to a clinical examination including urodynamics. When indicated, surgery for PPI was offered, and by January 2014, 46 patients had been operated on with either an artificial urinary sphincter or a sling. The outcome of PPI surgery was evaluated with a follow-up questionnaire. Successful outcome was defined in two ways: patient-reported satisfaction and using one or fewer pads/day. RESULTS: Of the 94 men with severe PPI more than 12 months after RP, 76 patients (81% response rate) met for clinical examination. Among them, 99% had intrinsic sphincter deficiency, in 67% coexisting with urodynamic bladder dysfunction. The presence of preoperative bladder dysfunction was not predictive of the outcome of PPI surgery. Preoperative use of fewer pads, less severe PPI, and a longer interval between RP and PPI surgery were associated with the successful outcome of one or fewer pads/day. Longer duration from RP to PPI surgery was the only preoperative factor associated with the successful outcome of satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The hypothesis was not supported as the presence of preoperative urodynamic bladder dysfunction was not predictive of the outcome of PPI surgery in this study.

How should continence and incontinence after radical prostatectomy be evaluated? A prospective study of patient ratings and changes with time.

PURPOSE: We examined prevalence rates, and changes in continence and incontinence before and after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer by comparing different definitions. We also studied the descriptive validity of the grading system of Ellison et al for post-prostatectomy incontinence and baseline predictors of post-prostatectomy incontinence at 12 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This national prospective study included 844 patients treated with radical prostatectomy between 2005 and 2009. Adverse effects, including urinary dysfunction and bother, were reported by 735 patients (88%) using the EPIC-50 and UCLA-PCI validated questionnaires at baseline and 12-month followup. Linear regression analysis was done to examine baseline predictors and the degree of post-prostatectomy incontinence at followup. RESULTS: At 12 months after radical prostatectomy 74% of patients reported post-prostatectomy incontinence, of whom 40% used pads daily, 34% reported occasional dribbling without pads and 26% had total urinary control. When defined as total incontinence/no urinary control, severe post-prostatectomy incontinence was reported by 3% of the men but 25% had severe post-prostatectomy incontinence according to the stratification of Ellison et al. Of patients with preoperative incontinence 14% improved postoperatively. Predictors of post-prostatectomy incontinence were age 65 years or greater, not working, sexual dysfunction and incontinence preoperatively. The latter 2 remained the strongest predictors on multivariate analysis. Prostate cancer related variables were not associated with post-prostatectomy incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of post-prostatectomy incontinence varied considerably according to the definition applied. In our opinion incontinence may be reported as any leakage and not only as pad use with grading done on a symptom scale. Preoperative sexual dysfunction and urinary incontinence were the strongest predictors of post-prostatectomy incontinence at 12-month followup.

Study of generic quality of life in patients operated on for post-prostatectomy incontinence.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between urological and psychosocial variables, and generic quality of life in patients operated on for post-prostatectomy incontinence has hardly been studied, and our aim was to investigate this relationship. METHODS: Patients who had an artificial urinary sphincter AMS800 (n = 100) implanted between January 2002 and June 2010 were invited to complete a mailed questionnaire covering demographic data including work ability, urinary and sexual function, anxiety/depression, and generic quality of life. Poor quality of life was defined as a score <40 on either the physical or the mental Short Form 12 summary scales. RESULTS: Of 85 compliant patients, 30 (35%) reported poor generic quality of life and 55 (65%) reported better quality of life at a median follow-up time of 26 months (range 6-104 months). The poor quality of life group showed significantly more overall urinary and sexual problems, and more men had undergone surgical revisions compared with the better quality of life group. Levels of anxiety and depression were significantly higher, and work ability was lower in the poor quality of life group. In multivariate logistic regression models, increased level of depression and impaired work ability, inability to reach orgasm, and not recommending the operation remained significantly associated with poor quality of life. CONCLUSION: Poor generic quality of life after surgery for post-prostatectomy incontinence is more strongly associated with reduced work ability and depression rather than urinary and sexual problems.