Pelvic floor muscle training before transurethral resection of the prostate: a randomized, controlled, blinded study. Impact of early pelvic floor rehabilitation after transurethral resection of the prostate. Effectiveness of early pelvic floor rehabilitation treatment for post-prostatectomy incontinence. Return to continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy: a randomized trial of verbal and written instructions versus therapist-directed pelvic floor muscle therapy. Comparative study of effects of extracorporeal magnetic innervation versus electrical stimulation for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. The recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy: a randomized trial comparing the effect of physiotherapist-guided pelvic floor muscle exercises with guidance by an instruction folder only. Urinary incontinence in men after formal one-to-one pelvic-floor muscle training following radical prostatectomy or transurethral resection of the prostate (MAPS): two parallel randomised controlled trials. Effect of pelvic-floor re-education on duration and degree of incontinence after radical prostatectomy: a randomised controlled trial. Editorial comment on: does physiotherapist-guided pelvic floor muscle training reduce urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy? A randomised controlled trial.
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of preoperative pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) in men scheduled for transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in a randomized, single-blind study.
                Fifty-eight men with benign prostatic obstruction were included, and 49 completed the study (training group, n=26; control group, n=23). The preoperative training included a 1-h individual lesson, three 1-h group lessons and a home training programme. Postoperatively and before discharge from hospital both groups received verbal instructions regarding PFMT. Pelvic floor muscle function was assessed by anal examination before and 4 weeks after surgery by one physiotherapist who was blinded to the randomization. The primary outcome parameter was the total score on the Danish Prostatic Symptom Score questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures were other subjective and objective voiding and incontinence parameters and four tests of the pelvic floor muscle: function; strength; static endurance; and dynamic endurance.
                Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. Improved static endurance occurred in the training group but not in the control group (p=0.004). Regarding dynamic endurance, a difference in favour of training developed between the groups (p=0.049). Many men produced results that were outside the test scales. At follow-up at 2 and 4 weeks and 3 months there were no differences between the groups in any of the lower urinary tract parameters.
                Preoperative PFMT produced a significant improvement in pelvic floor muscle endurance after TURP, but clinically relevant storage or voiding improvements did not occur. Pelvic floor muscle assessment tests need to be sex-specific. We examined the results of teaching pelvic floor muscle exercises (PME) on micturition parameters, urinary incontinence, post-micturition dribbling, and quality of life in patients after transurethral prostatectomy (TURP). Fifty-eight consecutive patients who were selected to undergo TURP for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were admitted into the study: 28 were randomly assigned to a control group (A), 30 formed the investigational group (B) during an initial visit conducted before surgery. In group B patients, perineal exercises were demonstrated in detail, and tested for their correct use via simultaneous rectal and abdominal examination. After the removal of the urethral catheter, these patients were instructed to perform pelvic floor muscle exercises at home and were evaluated before the exercises and at weekly intervals postoperatively. The American Urological Association Symptom Score improved significantly after TURP in both groups. The average quality of life score improved more significantly in group B after TURP, from 5.5 to 1.5 (P < 0.001). The grade of muscle contraction strength after 4 weeks of PME increased from 2.8 to 3.8 in group B (P < 0.01); it was unchanged in the group A. The number of patients with incontinence episodes and post-micturition dribbling was significantly lower in the group B at weeks 1, 2, and 3 (P < 0.01). Our results show that pelvic floor muscle re-education produces a quicker improvement of urinary symptoms and of quality of life in patients after TURP. Its early practice reduces urinary incontinence and post-micturition dribbling in the first postoperative weeks. The exercises are simple and easy to perform in the clinical setting and at home, and therefore should be recommended to all cooperative patients after TURP. Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy is a significant clinical problem. In this prospective study we investigate the effectiveness of early pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) on a large population, that had undergone radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) at our department.
                300 consecutive patients who had undergone RRP for clinically confined prostate cancer were randomized in two groups after catheter removal. One group of 150 patients took part in a structured PFMT program. This began before discharge and consisted of Kegel exercises. The remaining 150 patients constituted the control group, they were not formally instructed in PFMT. Incontinence was assessed objectively using the 1 hour and 24 hour pad test, as well as with the ICS-Male questionnaire. All patients who were incontinent after 6 months underwent urodynamic evaluation.
                In the treated group, 19% (29 patients) achieved continence after 1 month, and 94.6% (146 patients) after 6 months. In the control group 8% (12 patients) achieved continence after 1 month, and 65% (97 patients) after 6 months (p<0.001). Patient age did not correlate with continence in the control group (p>0.05), although a significant correlation was revealed within the treated group (p<0.01). Overall, 93.3% of the total population achieved continence after one year.
                After RRP an early supportive rehabilitation program like PFMT significantly reduces continence recovery time. To test the effectiveness of weekly postoperative pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) versus supportive telephone contact by a urology nurse for men at 4 weeks after radical prostatectomy.
                This was a randomized controlled trial in three Canadian centers. At 4 weeks after surgery, standardized verbal and written instruction about PFMT was provided to all subjects. Randomization occurred after initial instruction. Continence was defined as 8 g or less of urine loss on a 24-hour pad test. Primary outcome was grams of urine loss on pad test; secondary outcomes were International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Incontinence Impact Questionnaire (IIQ-7) score, cost, and perception of urine loss as a problem. Data were obtained at baseline (preoperatively) and at weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 28 and 1 year after surgery.
                A total of 216 men were enrolled; 11 were dry or withdrew at 4 weeks. Ninety-nine were randomized to the control group and 106 to the treatment group. There were no group differences at baseline for prostate-specific antigen level (mean [standard deviation] 8.4 [10.4] ng/mL; 7.6 [4.6] ng/mL), Gleason score (6.3 [0.86]), IPSS, IIQ-7 score, pad test, or voiding diary. At 8 weeks 23% of the control group and 20% of the treatment group were continent; at 12 weeks, 28% and 32%; 16 weeks, 40% and 44%; 28 weeks, 50% and 47%; and at 52 weeks, 64% and 60%, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups at any time point for the outcome variables.
                Verbal instruction and written information with telephone support seemed to be as effective as intensive PFMT. Less-intense therapy may be more cost-effective. To perform a randomized comparative study to investigate the clinical effects of extracorporeal magnetic innervation (ExMI) and functional electrical stimulation (FES) on urinary incontinence after retropubic radical prostatectomy.
                Thirty-six patients with urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy were randomly assigned to three groups (12 patients each in the FES, ExMI, and control groups). For FES, an anal electrode was used. Pulses of 20-Hz square waves at a 300-micros pulse duration were used for 15 minutes twice daily for 1 month. For ExMI, the Neocontrol system was used. The treatment sessions were for 20 minutes, twice a week for 2 months. The frequency of the pulse field was 10 Hz for 10 minutes, followed by a second treatment at 50 Hz for 10 minutes. For the control group, only pelvic floor muscle exercises were performed. Objective measures included bladder diaries, 24-hour pad weight testing, and a quality-of-life survey, at 1, 2, and 4 weeks and 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 months after removing the catheter.
                The leakage weight during the 24 hours after removing the catheter was 684, 698, and 664 g for the FES, ExMI, and control groups, respectively. At 1 month, it was 72, 83, and 175 g (FES versus control, P <0.05) and at 2 months was 54, 18, and 92 g (ExMI versus control, P <0.05) in the FES, ExMI, and control groups, respectively. Finally, 6 months later, the average 24-hour leakage weight was less than 10 g in all groups. Quality-of-life measures decreased after surgery, but gradually improved over time in all groups. No complications were noted in any of the groups.
                ExMI and FES therapies offered earlier continence compared with the control group after radical prostatectomy. We consider ExMI and FES to be recommendable options for patients who want quick improvement of postoperative urinary incontinence. To compare the effect on the recovery of incontinence after retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) of intensive physiotherapist-guided pelvic floor muscle exercises (PG-PFME) in addition to an information folder, with PFME explained to patients by an information folder only (F-PFME), and to determine independent predictors of failure to regain continence after RRP.
                We postulated that a 10% increase in the proportion of men who regained continence at 6 months with PG-PFME compared with men treated with F-PFME only would constitute a clinically relevant effect. To show statistical significance of this difference with a power of 80%, 96 men should be randomized to each of the two arms. One day before operation, all patients received verbal instruction and an information folder on PFME. Patients randomized to the F-PFME arm received no further physiotherapist guidance, whereas those in the PG-PFME arm received a maximum of nine sessions with the physiotherapist. The men underwent a 1-h pad-test at 1, 12 and 26 weeks, and a 24-h pad-test at 1, 4, 8, 12 and 26 weeks after catheter removal. We defined 'continence' as urine loss of <1 g at the 1-h and <4 g at the 24-h pad-test.
                During the 2-year recruitment period, the number of patients randomized fell short of the target determined by the sample size calculation, because of limitations of resources and unexpected changes in treatment preferences. Despite this, we analysed the data. Of the 82 randomized patients, 70 completed the study. Of these, 34 and 36 men had been assigned to the PG-PFME and the F-PFME group, respectively. At 6 months after RRP, 10 (30%) and nine (27%) men were completely dry on both the 1-h and 24-h pad-test in the PG-PFME and the F-PFME group, respectively (difference not significant). In a multivariate analysis the amount of urine loss at 1 week after catheter removal seemed to be an independent prognostic factor for failure to regain continence.
                PG-PFME seems to have no beneficial effect on the recovery of continence within the first 6 months after RRP, over an instruction folder-guided approach. However, due to under-powering there is a high risk of type II error. Nevertheless, these findings add to the knowledge base for availability in meta-analyses and can serve as a starting point for the design of new randomized studies. Urinary incontinence is common immediately after prostate surgery. Men are often advised to do pelvic-floor exercises, but evidence to support this is inconclusive. Our aim was to establish if formal one-to-one pelvic floor muscle training reduces incontinence.
                We undertook two randomised trials in men in the UK who were incontinent 6 weeks after radical prostatectomy (trial 1) or transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP; trial 2) to compare four sessions with a therapist over 3 months with standard care and lifestyle advice only. Randomisation was by remote computer allocation. Our primary endpoints, collected via postal questionnaires, were participants' reports of urinary incontinence and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) after 12 months. Group assignment was masked from outcome assessors, but this masking was not possible for participants or caregivers. We used intention-to-treat analyses to compare the primary outcome at 12 months. This study is registered, number ISRCTN87696430.
                In the intervention group in trial 1, the rate of urinary incontinence at 12 months (148 [76%] of 196) was not significantly different from the control group (151 [77%] of 195; absolute risk difference [RD] -1·9%, 95% CI -10 to 6). In trial 2, the difference in the rate of urinary incontinence at 12 months (126 [65%] of 194) from the control group was not significant (125 [62%] of 203; RD 3·4%, 95% CI -6 to 13). Adjusting for minimisation factors or doing treatment-received analyses did not change these results in either trial. No adverse effects were reported. In both trials, the intervention resulted in higher mean costs per patient (£180 and £209 respectively) but we did not identify evidence of an economically important difference in QALYs (0·002 [95% CI -0·027 to 0·023] and -0·00003 [-0·026 to 0·026]).
                In settings where information about pelvic-floor exercise is widely available, one-to-one conservative physical therapy for men who are incontinent after prostate surgery is unlikely to be effective or cost effective. The high rates of persisting incontinence after 12 months suggest a substantial unrecognised and unmet need for management in these men.
                National Institute of Health Research, Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) Programme.
                Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Urinary incontinence is a common long-term complication after radical prostatectomy. Spontaneous recovery of normal urinary control after surgery can take 1-2 years. We aimed to investigate whether there was any beneficial effect of pelvic-floor re-education for patients with urinary incontinence as a result of radical prostatectomy.
                102 consecutive incontinent patients who had had radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localised prostate cancer and who could comply with the ambulatory treatment schedule in our hospital were randomised, after catheter removal, into a treatment group (n=50) and a control group (n=52). Patients in the treatment group took part in a pelvic-floor re-education programme for as long as they were incontinent, and for a maximum of 1 year. The control group received placebo therapy. The primary endpoint was continence rate at 3 months. Incontinence was assessed objectively with the 1 h and 24 h pad tests and subjectively by the visual analogue scale. The groups were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis by ANOVA and chi2-test.
                In the treatment group continence was achieved after 3 months in 43 (88%) of 48 patients. In the control group, continence returned after 3 months in 29 (56%) of 52 patients. At 1 year, the difference in proportion between treatment and control group was 14% (95% CI 2-27). In the treatment group improvement in both duration (log-rank test, p=0.0001) and degree of incontinence (Wald test, p=0.0010) was significantly better than in the control group.
                Pelvic-floor re-education should be considered as a first-line option in curing incontinence after radical prostatectomy. nan
The value of the various approaches to conservative management of postprostatectomy incontinence after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain. It seems unlikely that men benefit from one-to-one pelvic floor muscle training therapy after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).  Long-term incontinence may be managed by external penile clamp, but there are safety problems.