SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • conservative treatment;
  • incontinence;
  • nerve stimulation;
  • penile vibratory stimulation;
  • prostatic neoplasms;
  • radical prostatectomy;
  • urinary incontinence

Aims

To examine penile vibratory stimulation (PVS) in the treatment of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence (UI).

Methods

Patients with post-prostatectomy UI were included in a 12-week trial. A 24-hr pad test and a 72-hr voiding diary were collected at baseline. Participants were randomized to receive PVS for the first 6 weeks (group 1) or for the final 6 weeks (group 2) of the study. The primary outcome was the difference in leakage between groups 1 and 2 at 6 weeks as measured by changes in the pad test. The trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.org (NCT01540656).

Results

Data from 31 men were available for analyses. The difference in the change on the pad test between the groups did not reach statistical significance at 6 weeks (P = 0.13) while the change in incontinence episodes between groups approached statistical significance (P = 0.052). However, there was a median reduction of −33 g (P = 0.021) on the pad test and a median reduction in daily incontinence episodes of −1 (P = 0.023) in group 1 at 6 weeks. At 12 weeks, group 2 had a median decrease on the pad test of −8 g (P = 0.10) and no change in incontinence episodes. A pooled analysis showed a decline on the pad test of −13.5 g (P = 0.004) after PVS. Small improvements were seen in subjective symptom scores and 58% stated to be satisfied with PVS. Self-limiting side effects were experienced by 15% of patients.

Conclusions

PVS is feasible in the treatment of post-prostatectomy UI. Larger trials are needed to document the clinical efficacy. Neurourol. Urodynam. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.