International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025
Effectiveness of electrical stimulation for treating male urinary incontinence after prostatectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tang Gonglin, Liu Ming, Chen Xin, Liu Chenyue, Zhao Jundong, Zhao Hongwei
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Prostatectomy frequently leads to postoperative urinary incontinence (UI), significantly impairing patients' quality of life. While pelvic floor muscle exercises (PFMEs) are commonly employed, the efficacy of electrical stimulation (ES) as a non-invasive adjunct remains debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of ES combined with PFME versus PFME alone for post-radical prostatectomy UI.
METHOD: A comprehensive search across PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ResearchGate identified 10 randomized controlled trials meeting inclusion criteria. Outcomes included 24-hour pad test, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF), quality of life (QOL), and incontinence control rate. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4.1, employing fixed- and random-effects models.
RESULTS: Short-term ES (≤3 months) significantly improved ICIQ-SF scores (mean difference [MD] = -3.50; 95% confidence interval: -5.11 to -1.89, P <0.0001) and doubled incontinence control rates (risk ratio = 2.01; P = 0.01), though no improvement was observed in 24-hour pad test (MD = -50.07; P = 0.30) or QOL. Conversely, long-term ES (≥6 months) demonstrated marked reductions in urinary leakage via the 24-hour pad test (MD = -21.64; P = 0.02), but no significant differences in ICIQ-SF scores or control rates compared to PFME alone.
CONCLUSION: Electrical stimulation therapy can be an effective treatment option for patients with post-RP UI. It can significantly improve UI symptoms in the short term and has a positive impact on reducing urinary leakage in the long term.
METHOD: A comprehensive search across PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ResearchGate identified 10 randomized controlled trials meeting inclusion criteria. Outcomes included 24-hour pad test, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF), quality of life (QOL), and incontinence control rate. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4.1, employing fixed- and random-effects models.
RESULTS: Short-term ES (≤3 months) significantly improved ICIQ-SF scores (mean difference [MD] = -3.50; 95% confidence interval: -5.11 to -1.89, P <0.0001) and doubled incontinence control rates (risk ratio = 2.01; P = 0.01), though no improvement was observed in 24-hour pad test (MD = -50.07; P = 0.30) or QOL. Conversely, long-term ES (≥6 months) demonstrated marked reductions in urinary leakage via the 24-hour pad test (MD = -21.64; P = 0.02), but no significant differences in ICIQ-SF scores or control rates compared to PFME alone.
CONCLUSION: Electrical stimulation therapy can be an effective treatment option for patients with post-RP UI. It can significantly improve UI symptoms in the short term and has a positive impact on reducing urinary leakage in the long term.