A narrative review: evaluation and surgical management of persistent and recurrent urinary incontinence after previous surgical treatment.

Abstract

Urinary incontinence after prostate treatment is associated with significant morbidity and impact on quality of life. Stress urinary incontinence can be treated by insertion of a urethral sling or artificial urinary sphincter. Persistent or recurrent urinary incontinence after such treatment can be frustrating and require specific evaluation and approach to management to optimize chance of successful outcomes and patient satisfaction whilst avoiding further patient morbidity. The aim of this review is to outline the evaluation and management of persistent and recurrent urinary incontinence in men after previous surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence by way of narrative review. A literature review was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar between 2010 to 2023. The search strategy included the following MeSH terms: device, men, urinary incontinence, persistence, recurrence, and revision. A total of 140 English-language articles were identified and reviewed; 68 articles were considered relevant to the aims and the findings have been outlined in this narrative review. There are many approaches currently practiced by surgeons in continence revision surgery. There is not clear consensus regarding optimum revision strategy for persistent and recurrent incontinence post urethral sling and artificial urinary sphincter insertion. Whilst small observational studies have reviewed different surgical approaches, there is a paucity of high volume comparative data from which to draw conclusions. However, there have been recent studies enabling a paradigm shift in the understanding of incontinence post artificial urinary sphincter insertion that may lead to improved revision strategies in future. There are various surgical modalities used to manage incontinence following urethral sling and artificial urinary sphincter insertion. There is currently no clear consensus on the optimal surgical technique for persistent or recurrent urinary incontinence after surgery. Further comparative studies would be beneficial to help guide surgeons as to which revision approaches would be suitable for select patients.