Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPavithran, A
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-21T15:45:20Z
dc.date.available2024-05-21T15:45:20Z
dc.identifier.citation5. BJU Int. 2024 May;133(5):513-523. doi: 10.1111/bju.16233. Epub 2023 Dec 13.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12904/18617
dc.description.abstractAIM: To provide a comprehensive review of guidelines from various professional organisations on the work-up and management of post-prostatectomy Incontinence (PPI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The following guidelines were included in this review: European Association of Urology (EAU 2023), American Urological Association/Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction (AUA/SUFU 2019), International Consultation on Incontinence (ICI, 2018), the Canadian Urological Association (CUA, 2012) and the Urological Society of India (USI, 2018). RESULTS: In general, the guidelines concur regarding the significance of conducting a comprehensive history and physical examination for patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI). However, there are variations among the guidelines concerning the recommended additional investigations. In cases of troublesome PPI, male slings are typically recommended for mild to moderate urinary incontinence (UI), while artificial urinary sphincters are preferred for moderate to severe UI, although the precise definition of this severity remains unclear. The guidelines provided by AUA/SUFU and the ICI have offered suggestions for managing complications or persistent/recurrent UI post-surgery, though some differences can be observed within these recommendations as well. CONCLUSION: This is a first of its kind review encompassing Guidelines on PPI spanning over a decade. Although guidelines share overarching principles, nuanced variations persist, posing challenges for clinicians. This compilation consolidates and highlights both the similarities and differences among guidelines, providing a comprehensive overview of PPI diagnosis and management for practitioners. It is our expectation that as more evidence emerges in this and other areas of PPI management, the guidelines will converge and address crucial patient-centric aspects.
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectPPIen_US
dc.subjectEuropean Association of Urologyen_US
dc.subjectAmerican Urological Associationen_US
dc.subjectSociety of Urodynamicsen_US
dc.subjectFemale Pelvic Medicineen_US
dc.subjectUrogenital Reconstructionen_US
dc.subjectCanadian Urological Associationen_US
dc.subjectUrological Society of Indiaen_US
dc.titlePost-prostatectomy incontinence: a guideline of guidelines.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
rioxxterms.funderDefault funderen_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectDefault projecten_US
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1111/bju.16233en_US
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_US
refterms.panelUnspecifieden_US
refterms.dateFirstOnline2024-05
html.description.abstractAIM: To provide a comprehensive review of guidelines from various professional organisations on the work-up and management of post-prostatectomy Incontinence (PPI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The following guidelines were included in this review: European Association of Urology (EAU 2023), American Urological Association/Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction (AUA/SUFU 2019), International Consultation on Incontinence (ICI, 2018), the Canadian Urological Association (CUA, 2012) and the Urological Society of India (USI, 2018). RESULTS: In general, the guidelines concur regarding the significance of conducting a comprehensive history and physical examination for patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI). However, there are variations among the guidelines concerning the recommended additional investigations. In cases of troublesome PPI, male slings are typically recommended for mild to moderate urinary incontinence (UI), while artificial urinary sphincters are preferred for moderate to severe UI, although the precise definition of this severity remains unclear. The guidelines provided by AUA/SUFU and the ICI have offered suggestions for managing complications or persistent/recurrent UI post-surgery, though some differences can be observed within these recommendations as well. CONCLUSION: This is a first of its kind review encompassing Guidelines on PPI spanning over a decade. Although guidelines share overarching principles, nuanced variations persist, posing challenges for clinicians. This compilation consolidates and highlights both the similarities and differences among guidelines, providing a comprehensive overview of PPI diagnosis and management for practitioners. It is our expectation that as more evidence emerges in this and other areas of PPI management, the guidelines will converge and address crucial patient-centric aspects.en_US
rioxxterms.funder.project94a427429a5bcfef7dd04c33360d80cden_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record