Comparison of Different Invasive Devices for the Treatment of Urinary Incontinence after Radical Prostatectomy

Table 4

36 prospective clinical trials included in the analysis: posttreatment results. Number of cases; mean ± SD or median and (range).

Author	N of patients	Treatment groups (A, B, C, D, and E)	N pad/day (post)	1 h pad test (g) (post)	24 h pad test (g) (post)	ICIQ-UI-SF (post)	% Pad free (post)
Suzuki et al. [10]	4	B	1.8 ± 1.3	—	—	—	50%
Suzuki et al. [10]	4	B	0.5 ± 0.6	—	—	—	50%
Migliari et al. [11]	49	B	—	—	—	—	67%
Bauer et al. [31]	115	B	—	—	24.7 (0–258)	5.3 (0–17)	68.8%
Bauer et al. [30]	137	B	2.1 (0–20)	47.6 (0–320)	—	9.2 (0–21)	51.6%
Migliari et al. [37]	9	B	—	—	—	—	55.5%
Bauer et al. [12]	124	B	0 ± 0.5	8.6 (0–45)	13.4 (0–125)	3.8 ± 4.2	55.8%
Ferro et al. [28]	29	B	0.3 ± 0.5	—	2.6 ± 5.4	0.9 ± 2.0
Galiano et al. [27]	52	B	0.7 ± 0.9	—	43.4 ± 109.9	—	52.9%
Leruth et al. [23]	173	B	—	—	—	—	49%
Zaragoza et al. [22]	4	B	—	—	—	—	50%
John et al. [21]	16	B	1.0 (0–10)	—	—	—	69%
Collado et al. [15]	94	B	—	—	—	2.1 (0–7)	75%
Collado et al. [14]	27	B	—	—	29.6 (19–40)	3.4 (0–13)
Trigo Rocha et al. [36]	40	D	0.6 ± 1.1	—	—	—	50%
Correia Lima et al. [32]	15	D	—-	—	75.72 ± 95.29	7.3 ± 7.2
Lai et al. [24]	129	D	1.1 ± 0.1 (0–8)	—	—	—
Trigo Rocha et al. [20]	25	E	1.8 ± 1.6	—	—	—	65%
Bauer et al. [41]	24	B	2.7 (0–12)	47 (0–138)	—	11.5 (0–21)	25%
Noordhof et al. [35]	143	E	0.2 (0–2)	—	—	—	50.6%
Seweryn et al. [34]	38	C	1.4 (0–10)	—	115.0 (0.1500)	—	60.5%
Kim et al. [33]	64	C	0.8 ± 1.2	—	—	10.55 ± 6.2	60.9%
Renè Yiou et al. [25]	20	E	0.3 ± 0.9	—	—	5.7 ± 5.7	66.7%
Renè Yiou et al. [29]	40	B	0.8 ± 1.2	—	—	8.1 ± 5.6	51.5%
Hoda et al. [26]	124	C	1.8 ± 1.2 (0–7)	—	—	—	61.6%
Hoda et al. [26]	99	C	1.3 (0–8)	—	79.7 (0–285)	—	63%%
Martens et al. [19]	29	E	3.1 (0–5)	—	—	—	31%
Introini et al. [18]	66	C	—	—	—	—	79%
Le Portz et al. [17]	93	B	—	—	40 (0–185)	—	34.4%
Dikranian et al. [16]	20	A	1.4 (0–2)	—	—	—	56%
Dikranian et al. [16]	16	B	0.4 (0–1)	—	—	—	87%
Gregori et al. [13]	11	E	—	—	17 ± 2.7	—
Cestari et al. [9]	120	B	—	—	—	1.8±-3.1	98%
Van Uhm et al. [38]	10	A	—	—	40.3 (5.9–130.6)	16.0 (12.5–17.5)	10%
Cestari et al. [39]	60	B	0.4 ± 0,8	—	—	1.8 ± 3.4	97%
Stephen J et al. [40]	15	B	—	—	—	—	67%
Crivellaro et al. [21]	46	E	2.5 (0–5)	—	—	—	68%
Crivellaro et al. [21]	38	B	1.4 (0–3)	—	—	—	64%
Queissert et al. [43]	12	C	0.9	—	70.0 (0–700.0)	5.5	75%

Note. Treatment group: A = bulking agent, B = fixed sling, C = adjustable sling, D = artificial sphincter, and E = ProACT. Grey horizontal rows represent the second arm of treatment in the same trial.