Limits...
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial.

Lima JP, Pompeo AC, Bezerra CA - Int Braz J Urol (2016 May-Jun)

Bottom Line: Significant improvement of the 24-hour pad test was observed with the Argus T® sling (p=0.038), With regard to the other parameters, there was no significant difference between the two groups.Removal of the Argus T® device due to perineal pain was performed in one patient (9%).Better results were observed in the 24h pad test and in levels of satisfactionwith the Argus T® device.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Departamento de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the results of two slings, Argus T® and Advance®, for the treatment of postprostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPUI).

Material and methods: From December 2010 to December 2011, 22 patients with PPUI were randomized as follows: 11 (mean age 62.09(±5.30)) underwent treatment with Advance® and 11 (mean age 62.55(±8.54)) with Argus T®. All patients were evaluated preoperatively with urodynamic testing, quality of life questionnaire (ICIQ-SF), voiding diary and 24-hour pad test. Exclusion criteria were: neurological diseases, severe detrusor overactivity and urethral stenosis. Evaluation was performed at 6, 12 and 18 months after the surgery. After implantation of the Argus T® sling, patients who experienced urine leakage equal to or greater than the initial volume underwent adjustment of the sling tension. Results were statistically analyzed using the Fisher's test, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Friedman's non-parametric test or the Mann-Whitney test.

Results: Significant improvement of the 24-hour pad test was observed with the Argus T® sling (p=0.038), With regard to the other parameters, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Removal of the Argus T® device due to perineal pain was performed in one patient (9%). Despite non uniform results, both devices were considered useful to improve quality of life (ICIQ-SF): Argus T® (p=0.018) and Advance® (p=0.017).

Conclusions: Better results were observed in the 24h pad test and in levels of satisfactionwith the Argus T® device. Both slings contributed to improve quality of life (ICIQ-SF), with acceptable side effects.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Study design.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4920571&req=5

f01: Study design.

Mentions: Figure-1 shows the patient recruitment and randomization flowchart.


Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial.

Lima JP, Pompeo AC, Bezerra CA - Int Braz J Urol (2016 May-Jun)

Study design.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4920571&req=5

f01: Study design.
Mentions: Figure-1 shows the patient recruitment and randomization flowchart.

Bottom Line: Significant improvement of the 24-hour pad test was observed with the Argus T® sling (p=0.038), With regard to the other parameters, there was no significant difference between the two groups.Removal of the Argus T® device due to perineal pain was performed in one patient (9%).Better results were observed in the 24h pad test and in levels of satisfactionwith the Argus T® device.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Departamento de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the results of two slings, Argus T® and Advance®, for the treatment of postprostatectomy urinary incontinence (PPUI).

Material and methods: From December 2010 to December 2011, 22 patients with PPUI were randomized as follows: 11 (mean age 62.09(±5.30)) underwent treatment with Advance® and 11 (mean age 62.55(±8.54)) with Argus T®. All patients were evaluated preoperatively with urodynamic testing, quality of life questionnaire (ICIQ-SF), voiding diary and 24-hour pad test. Exclusion criteria were: neurological diseases, severe detrusor overactivity and urethral stenosis. Evaluation was performed at 6, 12 and 18 months after the surgery. After implantation of the Argus T® sling, patients who experienced urine leakage equal to or greater than the initial volume underwent adjustment of the sling tension. Results were statistically analyzed using the Fisher's test, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Friedman's non-parametric test or the Mann-Whitney test.

Results: Significant improvement of the 24-hour pad test was observed with the Argus T® sling (p=0.038), With regard to the other parameters, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Removal of the Argus T® device due to perineal pain was performed in one patient (9%). Despite non uniform results, both devices were considered useful to improve quality of life (ICIQ-SF): Argus T® (p=0.018) and Advance® (p=0.017).

Conclusions: Better results were observed in the 24h pad test and in levels of satisfactionwith the Argus T® device. Both slings contributed to improve quality of life (ICIQ-SF), with acceptable side effects.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus