Abstract
Introduction: Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy is a significant clinical problem. We evaluated the clinical usefulness of early-onset pelvic floor reeducation (EPFR) as compared with later-onset pelvic floor reeducation (LPFR) in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Patients and Methods: The continence status of 132 consecutive patients who underwent retropubic radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer was assessed 1 year later by a standardized questionnaire. Fifty-eight patients started EPFR 7 days after surgery. Fifty-five patients attended LPFR 4 weeks after surgery. Forty-six patients received no pelvic floor retraining, 28 attended LPFR without EPFR, 27 patients received EPFR and LPFR, and 31 patients attended EPFR without LPFR. Results: Overall, 87 men were continent, 37 patients felt moderately incontinent, and 8 men suffered from severe incontinence. We could not observe a statistically significant influence of any kind of pelvic floor reeducation on continence status, time to continence, frequency or volume of urine loss, or the use of pads. Conclusion: A routine prophylactic use of combined EPFR and LPFR in all patients does not seem to be justified.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
