A Parallel Randomized Clinical Trial Examining the Return of Urinary Continence after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy with or without a Small Intestinal Submucosa Bladder Neck Sling

Clinton Bahler, Chandru Sundaram, Naveen Kella, Steven M. Lucas, Michelle A. Boger, Thomas Gardner, Michael Koch

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Urinary continence is a driver of quality of life after radical prostatectomy. In this study we evaluated the impact of a biological bladder neck sling on the return of urinary continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: This study compared early continence in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with a sling and without a sling in a 2-group, 1:1, parallel, randomized controlled trial. Patients were blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was defined as urinary continence (0 to 1 pad per day) at 1 month postoperatively. Inclusion criteria were organ confined prostate cancer and a prostate specific antigen less than 15 ng/ml. Exclusion criteria were any prior surgery on the prostate, a history of neurogenic bladder and history of pelvic radiation. A chi-squared test was used for the primary outcome. Results: A total of 147 patients were randomized (control 74, sling 73) and 92% were available for primary end point analysis at 1 month. There were no significant differences in baseline or perioperative data except that operating room time was 20.1 minutes longer for the sling group (p=0.04). The continence rate was similar between the control and sling groups at 1 month (47.1% vs 55.2%, p=0.34) and 12 months (86.7% vs 94.5%, p=0.15), respectively. Adverse events were similar between the control and sling groups (10.8% vs 13.7%, p=0.59). Conclusions: The application of an absorbable urethral sling at robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was well tolerated with no increase in obstructive symptoms in this randomized trial. However, the sling failed to show a significant improvement in continence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Urology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2016

Fingerprint

Prostatectomy
Urinary Bladder
Randomized Controlled Trials
Prostatic Neoplasms
Suburethral Slings
Neurogenic Urinary Bladder
Control Groups
Operating Rooms
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Prostate
Quality of Life
Radiation

Keywords

  • Laparoscopy
  • Prostatic neoplasms
  • Robotics
  • Urinary incontinence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

@article{a41aecb5d1ef44009412fa3a2fe95fa8,
title = "A Parallel Randomized Clinical Trial Examining the Return of Urinary Continence after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy with or without a Small Intestinal Submucosa Bladder Neck Sling",
abstract = "Purpose: Urinary continence is a driver of quality of life after radical prostatectomy. In this study we evaluated the impact of a biological bladder neck sling on the return of urinary continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: This study compared early continence in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with a sling and without a sling in a 2-group, 1:1, parallel, randomized controlled trial. Patients were blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was defined as urinary continence (0 to 1 pad per day) at 1 month postoperatively. Inclusion criteria were organ confined prostate cancer and a prostate specific antigen less than 15 ng/ml. Exclusion criteria were any prior surgery on the prostate, a history of neurogenic bladder and history of pelvic radiation. A chi-squared test was used for the primary outcome. Results: A total of 147 patients were randomized (control 74, sling 73) and 92{\%} were available for primary end point analysis at 1 month. There were no significant differences in baseline or perioperative data except that operating room time was 20.1 minutes longer for the sling group (p=0.04). The continence rate was similar between the control and sling groups at 1 month (47.1{\%} vs 55.2{\%}, p=0.34) and 12 months (86.7{\%} vs 94.5{\%}, p=0.15), respectively. Adverse events were similar between the control and sling groups (10.8{\%} vs 13.7{\%}, p=0.59). Conclusions: The application of an absorbable urethral sling at robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was well tolerated with no increase in obstructive symptoms in this randomized trial. However, the sling failed to show a significant improvement in continence.",
keywords = "Laparoscopy, Prostatic neoplasms, Robotics, Urinary incontinence",
author = "Clinton Bahler and Chandru Sundaram and Naveen Kella and Lucas, {Steven M.} and Boger, {Michelle A.} and Thomas Gardner and Michael Koch",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2016.01.010",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Parallel Randomized Clinical Trial Examining the Return of Urinary Continence after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy with or without a Small Intestinal Submucosa Bladder Neck Sling

AU - Bahler, Clinton

AU - Sundaram, Chandru

AU - Kella, Naveen

AU - Lucas, Steven M.

AU - Boger, Michelle A.

AU - Gardner, Thomas

AU - Koch, Michael

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Purpose: Urinary continence is a driver of quality of life after radical prostatectomy. In this study we evaluated the impact of a biological bladder neck sling on the return of urinary continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: This study compared early continence in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with a sling and without a sling in a 2-group, 1:1, parallel, randomized controlled trial. Patients were blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was defined as urinary continence (0 to 1 pad per day) at 1 month postoperatively. Inclusion criteria were organ confined prostate cancer and a prostate specific antigen less than 15 ng/ml. Exclusion criteria were any prior surgery on the prostate, a history of neurogenic bladder and history of pelvic radiation. A chi-squared test was used for the primary outcome. Results: A total of 147 patients were randomized (control 74, sling 73) and 92% were available for primary end point analysis at 1 month. There were no significant differences in baseline or perioperative data except that operating room time was 20.1 minutes longer for the sling group (p=0.04). The continence rate was similar between the control and sling groups at 1 month (47.1% vs 55.2%, p=0.34) and 12 months (86.7% vs 94.5%, p=0.15), respectively. Adverse events were similar between the control and sling groups (10.8% vs 13.7%, p=0.59). Conclusions: The application of an absorbable urethral sling at robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was well tolerated with no increase in obstructive symptoms in this randomized trial. However, the sling failed to show a significant improvement in continence.

AB - Purpose: Urinary continence is a driver of quality of life after radical prostatectomy. In this study we evaluated the impact of a biological bladder neck sling on the return of urinary continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: This study compared early continence in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with a sling and without a sling in a 2-group, 1:1, parallel, randomized controlled trial. Patients were blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was defined as urinary continence (0 to 1 pad per day) at 1 month postoperatively. Inclusion criteria were organ confined prostate cancer and a prostate specific antigen less than 15 ng/ml. Exclusion criteria were any prior surgery on the prostate, a history of neurogenic bladder and history of pelvic radiation. A chi-squared test was used for the primary outcome. Results: A total of 147 patients were randomized (control 74, sling 73) and 92% were available for primary end point analysis at 1 month. There were no significant differences in baseline or perioperative data except that operating room time was 20.1 minutes longer for the sling group (p=0.04). The continence rate was similar between the control and sling groups at 1 month (47.1% vs 55.2%, p=0.34) and 12 months (86.7% vs 94.5%, p=0.15), respectively. Adverse events were similar between the control and sling groups (10.8% vs 13.7%, p=0.59). Conclusions: The application of an absorbable urethral sling at robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was well tolerated with no increase in obstructive symptoms in this randomized trial. However, the sling failed to show a significant improvement in continence.

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - Prostatic neoplasms

KW - Robotics

KW - Urinary incontinence

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84969492213&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84969492213&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2016.01.010

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2016.01.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 26784645

AN - SCOPUS:84969492213

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

ER -