REVIEW   Free access

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2017 June;69(3):234-41

DOI: 10.23736/S0393-2249.16.02790-9

Copyright © 2016 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

The role of detrusor overactivity in urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review

Antonio L. PASTORE ^{1, 2}, Giovanni PALLESCHI ^{1, 2}, Ester ILLIANO ³, Alessandro ZUCCHI ³, Antonio CARBONE ^{1, 2}, Elisabetta COSTANTINI ³ ✉

¹ Urology Unit, Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Faculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy; ² Uroresearch Association, Latina, Italy; ³ Urology and Andrology Department, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this review was to assess the evidence provided by literature regarding the role of detrusor overactivity (DO) in determining urinary incontinence in patients submitted to radical prostatectomy.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The research was based on the online PubMed database spanning the period from November 1997 to May 2016. The review was conducted in accordance with the systematic review guidelines provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of twenty-three articles met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review. The eligible studies included a total of 812 patients with a mean number of 36 patients per study (range 29-264). The rate of patients with urodynamic DO after radical prostatectomy and reporting urge urinary incontinence ranged from 3 to 63%. The postradical prostatectomy DO was more likely to occur in patients who already had it preoperatively [OR =2.30, 95% CI: 1.39-3.82; studies 9; participants 419]. However, most representative studies accordingly indicate that intrinsic sphincter deficiency is the most common cause of postprostatectomy incontinence (PPI), considered as the sole responsible factor for such patients’ incontinence (88-100% of patients evaluated); the same studies report that isolated bladder dysfunction is uncommon and that it occurs in only 3% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: The review results suggest that DO could be considered as another possible underlying mechanism for PPI. Although sphincter incompetence and weakness are the most common mechanisms related to incontinence after prostatectomy, DO may coexist or be an isolated cause of PPI. Therefore, urodynamic studies are essential to show which is and/or are the exact cause(s) of incontinence in each individual patient after RP.

KEY WORDS: Prostatectomy - Urinary incontinence, urge - Urinary bladder, overactive