Current interventional management of male stress urinary incontinence following urological procedures
Ostrowski I., Śledź E., Ciechan J., Golabek T., Bukowczan J., Przydacz M.
Narrative Review, published in Cent European J Urol (2015) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Cent European J Urol (2015)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 26568879
- PMCID
- PMC4643709
- DOI
- 10.5173/ceju.2015.616
- Citations
- 19
Abstract (original English)
Introduction Despite improvements in surgical techniques and implementation of minimally invasive procedures, male stress urinary incontinence affects a substantial number of patients after prostatic surgery. In response to increasing demand of optimal treatment modality, new alternatives to artificial urinary sphincter have recently been introduced. This review summarises the therapeutic surgical options with their outcomes in management of postprostatectomy stress incontinence. Material and methods We performed a literature review by searching the PubMed, Web of Science and Embase databases for articles published from January 2000 until April 2015 based on clinical relevance. Results Artificial urinary sphincter is currently considered the "gold standard" treatment of male stress urinary incontinence. Although the new devices in this group have recently been investigated, the AMS 800 remains the only widely used implant. Male slings and adjustable continence devices, achieve the social continence rates up to 60%. Periurethral injections of bulking agents, have limited efficacy of male stress incontinence. Argus sling and ProACT are both associated with substantial explantation rates. Stem cell therapy is a promising option but still requires additional testing. Conclusions The development of new alternatives to artificial urinary sphincter is constantly progressing. Although
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.