Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | International Braz J Urol (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382016000300531 |
Resumo: | 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 satisfaction with the Argus T® device. Both slings contributed to improve quality of life (ICIQ-SF), with acceptable side effects. |
id |
SBU-1_035759761930a1860d25ea7653c6718f |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1677-55382016000300531 |
network_acronym_str |
SBU-1 |
network_name_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trialSuburethral SlingsUrinary IncontinenceTherapeuticsABSTRACT 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 satisfaction with the Argus T® device. Both slings contributed to improve quality of life (ICIQ-SF), with acceptable side effects.Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia2016-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382016000300531International braz j urol v.42 n.3 2016reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)instacron:SBU10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0075info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLima,João Paulo CunhaPompeo,Antonio Carlos LimaBezerra,Carlos Albertoeng2016-06-28T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1677-55382016000300531Revistahttp://www.brazjurol.com.br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br1677-61191677-5538opendoar:2016-06-28T00:00International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial |
title |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial |
spellingShingle |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial Lima,João Paulo Cunha Suburethral Slings Urinary Incontinence Therapeutics |
title_short |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial |
title_full |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial |
title_fullStr |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial |
title_sort |
Argus T® versus Advance® Sling for postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: A randomized clinical trial |
author |
Lima,João Paulo Cunha |
author_facet |
Lima,João Paulo Cunha Pompeo,Antonio Carlos Lima Bezerra,Carlos Alberto |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Pompeo,Antonio Carlos Lima Bezerra,Carlos Alberto |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Lima,João Paulo Cunha Pompeo,Antonio Carlos Lima Bezerra,Carlos Alberto |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Suburethral Slings Urinary Incontinence Therapeutics |
topic |
Suburethral Slings Urinary Incontinence Therapeutics |
description |
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 satisfaction with the Argus T® device. Both slings contributed to improve quality of life (ICIQ-SF), with acceptable side effects. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-06-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382016000300531 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-55382016000300531 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0075 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
International braz j urol v.42 n.3 2016 reponame:International Braz J Urol (Online) instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) instacron:SBU |
instname_str |
Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) |
instacron_str |
SBU |
institution |
SBU |
reponame_str |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
collection |
International Braz J Urol (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
International Braz J Urol (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia (SBU) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||brazjurol@brazjurol.com.br |
_version_ |
1750318074936950784 |