AB059. Pelvic floor reconstruction after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of different surgical techniques
Printed Abstracts

AB059. Pelvic floor reconstruction after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of different surgical techniques

Jianfeng Cui, Yan Li, Shouzhen Chen, Yong Wang, Yangyang Xia, Benkang Shi

Department of Urology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China


Background: A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of different techniques of pelvic floor reconstruction on urinary continence.

Methods: A comprehensive search was made for trials that evaluated the efficacy of pelvic floor reconstruction. Relevant databases included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Ovid, Web of Science databases and relevant trials from the references. Random-effects model was used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) statistics.

Results: Pooled results of patients treated with posterior reconstruction demonstrated complete urinary continence improved at all timepoint following catheter removal. Anterior suspension was associated with improvement only at 28–42 days.

Conclusions: Patients who underwent RP and PR had the least urinary incontinence. No significant benefit was observed after AS. AR + PR and AS + PR had little benefit in the post-operative period.

Keywords: Prostate cancer; posterior reconstruction; anterior suspension; urinary incontinence


doi: 10.21037/tau.2017.s059


Cite this abstract as: Cui J, Li Y, Chen S, Wang Y, Xia Y, Shi B. Pelvic floor reconstruction after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of different surgical techniques. Transl Androl Urol 2017;6(Suppl 3):AB059. doi: 10.21037/tau.2017.s059