Prevalence analysis of urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy and influential preoperative factors in a single institution

Figures & data

Table 1. Characteristics of the patients from the series.

		Continent	Incontinent
Patient no (%)	746 (98.4%)	574 (76.9%)	172 (23%)	p
Age (years)				.000
Mean	63	62.3	65.3
Median	63	62	66
Range	41–83	41–81	48–83
Body mass index (kg/m^2) (%)				.7
Mean	27.4	27.4	27.2
Range	16.3–48	20.6–41.4	16.3–48
≤24.9	169 (22.7%)	124 (21.6%)	45 (26.2%)	.437
25–29.9	433 (58%)	339 (59.1%)	94 (54.7%)
≥30	143 (19.2%)	110 (19.2%)	33 (19.2%)
Digital rectal examination				.464
Normal	477 (63.9%)	368 (64%)	108 (66.3%)
Abnormal	217 (29.1%)	163 (28.4%)	55 (33.7%)
PSA (ng/ml)				.535
Mean	9.27	9.17	9.6
Median	7.06	6.8	7.73
Range	2–136	2.2–136	2–40.9
Prior TURP	38 (6.8%)	22 (5.1%)	16 (12.4%)	.007
Previous LUTS	91 (12.2%)	63 (10.9%)	28 (16.1%)	.030
Biopsy Gleason score
≤6	500 (70%)	377 (69.2%)	117 (69.2%)
7	149 (21%)	124 (22.8%)	33 (19.2%)
≥8	63 (9%)	44 (8.1%)	19 (11.2%)
D’Amico risk categories				.299
Low risk	380 (52%)	296 (53%)	84 (48.8%)
Intermediate risk	222 (30.4%)	168 (30.1%)	54 (31.4%)
High risk	129 (17.3%)	95 (17%)	34 (19.8%)
MRI result				.661
Normal	442 (59.2%)	342 (59.6%)	100 (58.1%)
Extraprostatic extension	145 (19.5%)	109 (18%)	36 (18.4%)
Surgerical approach				.646
RRP	545 (73.1%)	417 (72.6%)	128 (74.4%)
LRP	201 (27%)	157 (27.4%)	44 (25.6%)
Nerve Sparing Technique				.028
	431 (57.8%)	343 (60%)	88 (50.6%)
Time of surgery (minutes)				.727
Mean	184	184	182
Median	164	164	166
Range	65–542	65–542	81-420
Blood transfusion	76 (10.6%)	76 (10.6%)	24 (14%)	.063
Pathological stage				.006
T2	535 (72.1%)	424 (74.4%)	114 (66.3%)
≥T3	207 (27.9%)	146 (25.6%)	58 (33.7%)
Pathologic Gleason score				.19
≤6	425 (58.1%)	337 (59.9%)	88 (52.1%)
7	178 (24.3%)	130 (22.6%)	48 (28.4%)
≥8	129 (17.6%)	96 (17.1%)	33 (19.5%)
Surgical margins				.913
Negative	495 (66.6%)	381 (66.7%)	114 (66.3%)
Positive	248 (33.3%)	190 (33.3%)	58 (33.7%)

Table 2. Comparative analysis of measurements obtained by MRI.

	Continent	Incontinent	p
Prostate length	4.4 (±0.89)	4.5 (±1.01)	0.227
Prostate width	5.1 (±0.69)	5.1 (±0.83)	0.989
Prostate height	3.8 (±0.69)	3.9 (±0.83)	0.329
Prostate volume	53 (±21)	59 (±30)	0.027
Levator ani muscle thickness	0.51 (±0.19)	0.51 (±0.18)	0.868
Obturator internal muscle thickness	1.49 (±0.46)	1.35 (±0.48)	0.019
Membranous urethral length	1.45 (±0.32)	1.36 (±0.29)	0.007
Urethral wall thickness	1.36 (±0.21)	1.44 (±0.25)	0.020

Bold numbers represents p value < .05.

Table 3. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

	Univariate		Multivariate
	OR (95 % CI)	p	OR (95 % CI)	p
Age	1.068 (1.04–1.096)	.000	1.055 (1.006–1.107)	.028
Previous TURP	2.52 (1.26–4.98)	.009	6.13 (1.86–20.18)	.003
Previous LUTS	1.98 (1.21–3.26)	.007
Obturator internus muscle thickness	0.615 (0.35–0.83)	.005
Urethral wall thickness	4.98 (1.2–20.7)	.027	5.03 (1.11–22.8)	.036
Membranous urethral length	0.57 (0.38–0.87)	.009	0.173 (0.046–0.64)	.009

Bold numbers represents p value < .05.

Figure 1. Calibration plot.

Figure 2. ROC-curve.

Figure 3. CUN-nomogram. Variables have a value that should be searched in each horizontal line. For each value, a score out of 100 is given in the upper horizontal line. We have to combine the scores and search the result in total score line, after drawing a perpendicular line we obtain probability.