男性压力性尿失禁分级量表(msig)用于评估前列腺切除术后尿失禁的男性:一项试点研究。

Video journal of prosthetic urology Pub Date : 2016-02-24
Allen Morey, Nirmish Singla, Paul Chung, Alexandra Klein, Timothy Tausch, Jordan Siegel, Isamu Tachibana, Jeremy Scott, Maude Carmel
{"title":"男性压力性尿失禁分级量表(msig)用于评估前列腺切除术后尿失禁的男性:一项试点研究。","authors":"Allen Morey,&nbsp;Nirmish Singla,&nbsp;Paul Chung,&nbsp;Alexandra Klein,&nbsp;Timothy Tausch,&nbsp;Jordan Siegel,&nbsp;Isamu Tachibana,&nbsp;Jeremy Scott,&nbsp;Maude Carmel","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We developed an objective clinical grading scale to characterize post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) and evaluated its use as a tool to facilitate male anti-incontinence procedure selection.</p><p><strong>Protocol: </strong>Between September 2014 and July 2015, we prospectively implemented a novel Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale (MSIGS) to stratify PPI patients based on incontinence severity. Patients included were those referred for PPI who had no prior anti-incontinence surgery. During the initial outpatient consultation, each patient was prospectively assigned an incontinence grade score of 0 through 4 based on the consensus of 2 examiners performing a standing cough test (SCT). All patients refrained from voiding for at least 60 minutes prior to the SCT. Men with mild SUI (MSIGS grades 0-2) were offered AdVance sling surgery while those with heavier SUI (MSIGS grades 3-4) were offered artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). MSIGS grade was correlated to patient-reported pads-per-day (PPD), and patient-reported outcomes of anti-incontinence surgery were assessed.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>Of 62 consecutive new PPI patients, 20 were graded as mild based on SCT [five (8%) grade 0, 10 (16%) grade 1, five (8%) grade 2] while 42 were graded as moderate-severe [10 (16%) grade 3, 32 (52%) grade 4]. MSIGS grade demonstrated a strong correlation with preoperative PPD (r=0.74). Among the 53 patients who underwent surgical intervention for PPI, 14 with mild SUI were treated with AdVance® male urethral sling (MSIGS grade 0, 1, or 2) while 39 more severe cases received AUS (MSIGS grade 3 or 4). Patient-reported improvement was high overall (median 95%) and similar for sling and AUS patients (95% and 96.5% respectively, p=0.596). The median time from radical prostatectomy to anti-incontinence surgery was 5.4 years (range 1-20).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale provides a rapid, simple, non-invasive, objective assessment of PPI severity which strongly correlates with patient-reported pads-per-day and appears to facilitate anti-incontinence surgical procedure selection.</p>","PeriodicalId":92973,"journal":{"name":"Video journal of prosthetic urology","volume":"2 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7133709/pdf/nihms-1065561.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale (MSIGS) for Evaluation of Men with Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence: A Pilot Study.\",\"authors\":\"Allen Morey,&nbsp;Nirmish Singla,&nbsp;Paul Chung,&nbsp;Alexandra Klein,&nbsp;Timothy Tausch,&nbsp;Jordan Siegel,&nbsp;Isamu Tachibana,&nbsp;Jeremy Scott,&nbsp;Maude Carmel\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We developed an objective clinical grading scale to characterize post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) and evaluated its use as a tool to facilitate male anti-incontinence procedure selection.</p><p><strong>Protocol: </strong>Between September 2014 and July 2015, we prospectively implemented a novel Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale (MSIGS) to stratify PPI patients based on incontinence severity. Patients included were those referred for PPI who had no prior anti-incontinence surgery. During the initial outpatient consultation, each patient was prospectively assigned an incontinence grade score of 0 through 4 based on the consensus of 2 examiners performing a standing cough test (SCT). All patients refrained from voiding for at least 60 minutes prior to the SCT. Men with mild SUI (MSIGS grades 0-2) were offered AdVance sling surgery while those with heavier SUI (MSIGS grades 3-4) were offered artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). MSIGS grade was correlated to patient-reported pads-per-day (PPD), and patient-reported outcomes of anti-incontinence surgery were assessed.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>Of 62 consecutive new PPI patients, 20 were graded as mild based on SCT [five (8%) grade 0, 10 (16%) grade 1, five (8%) grade 2] while 42 were graded as moderate-severe [10 (16%) grade 3, 32 (52%) grade 4]. MSIGS grade demonstrated a strong correlation with preoperative PPD (r=0.74). Among the 53 patients who underwent surgical intervention for PPI, 14 with mild SUI were treated with AdVance® male urethral sling (MSIGS grade 0, 1, or 2) while 39 more severe cases received AUS (MSIGS grade 3 or 4). Patient-reported improvement was high overall (median 95%) and similar for sling and AUS patients (95% and 96.5% respectively, p=0.596). The median time from radical prostatectomy to anti-incontinence surgery was 5.4 years (range 1-20).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale provides a rapid, simple, non-invasive, objective assessment of PPI severity which strongly correlates with patient-reported pads-per-day and appears to facilitate anti-incontinence surgical procedure selection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":92973,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Video journal of prosthetic urology\",\"volume\":\"2 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7133709/pdf/nihms-1065561.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Video journal of prosthetic urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Video journal of prosthetic urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

前言:我们开发了一个客观的临床分级量表来描述前列腺切除术后尿失禁(PPI),并评估其作为一种工具的使用,以促进男性抗尿失禁手术的选择。方案:在2014年9月至2015年7月期间,我们前瞻性地实施了一种新的男性压力失禁分级量表(msig),根据失禁严重程度对PPI患者进行分层。纳入的患者是那些接受过PPI的患者,他们之前没有做过防失禁手术。在最初的门诊会诊期间,根据2名检查人员进行站立咳嗽试验(SCT)的共识,前瞻性地为每位患者分配尿失禁等级0到4分。所有患者在SCT前至少60分钟没有排尿。轻度SUI患者(MSIGS评分0-2)接受高级吊带手术,重度SUI患者(MSIGS评分3-4)接受人工尿括约肌(AUS)。msig分级与患者报告的每日尿垫(PPD)相关,并评估患者报告的抗失禁手术结果。结果:在62例连续新发PPI患者中,20例根据SCT分级为轻度[5例(8%)为0级,10例(16%)为1级,5例(8%)为2级],42例为中重度[10例(16%)为3级,32例(52%)为4级]。msig分级与术前PPD有很强的相关性(r=0.74)。在53例因PPI而接受手术干预的患者中,14例轻度SUI患者接受AdVance®男性尿道吊带治疗(msig等级为0、1或2),39例重度患者接受AUS (msig等级为3或4)。患者报告的总体改善较高(中位数为95%),吊带和AUS患者的改善相似(分别为95%和96.5%,p=0.596)。从根治性前列腺切除术到抗尿失禁手术的中位时间为5.4年(范围1-20年)。讨论:男性压力性尿失禁分级量表提供了一种快速、简单、无创、客观的PPI严重程度评估,该评估与患者报告的每日尿垫量密切相关,似乎有助于选择反尿失禁的手术方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale (MSIGS) for Evaluation of Men with Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence: A Pilot Study.

Introduction: We developed an objective clinical grading scale to characterize post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) and evaluated its use as a tool to facilitate male anti-incontinence procedure selection.

Protocol: Between September 2014 and July 2015, we prospectively implemented a novel Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale (MSIGS) to stratify PPI patients based on incontinence severity. Patients included were those referred for PPI who had no prior anti-incontinence surgery. During the initial outpatient consultation, each patient was prospectively assigned an incontinence grade score of 0 through 4 based on the consensus of 2 examiners performing a standing cough test (SCT). All patients refrained from voiding for at least 60 minutes prior to the SCT. Men with mild SUI (MSIGS grades 0-2) were offered AdVance sling surgery while those with heavier SUI (MSIGS grades 3-4) were offered artificial urinary sphincter (AUS). MSIGS grade was correlated to patient-reported pads-per-day (PPD), and patient-reported outcomes of anti-incontinence surgery were assessed.

Outcome: Of 62 consecutive new PPI patients, 20 were graded as mild based on SCT [five (8%) grade 0, 10 (16%) grade 1, five (8%) grade 2] while 42 were graded as moderate-severe [10 (16%) grade 3, 32 (52%) grade 4]. MSIGS grade demonstrated a strong correlation with preoperative PPD (r=0.74). Among the 53 patients who underwent surgical intervention for PPI, 14 with mild SUI were treated with AdVance® male urethral sling (MSIGS grade 0, 1, or 2) while 39 more severe cases received AUS (MSIGS grade 3 or 4). Patient-reported improvement was high overall (median 95%) and similar for sling and AUS patients (95% and 96.5% respectively, p=0.596). The median time from radical prostatectomy to anti-incontinence surgery was 5.4 years (range 1-20).

Discussion: The Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale provides a rapid, simple, non-invasive, objective assessment of PPI severity which strongly correlates with patient-reported pads-per-day and appears to facilitate anti-incontinence surgical procedure selection.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Male Stress Incontinence Grading Scale (MSIGS) for Evaluation of Men with Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence: A Pilot Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1