CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT05116592PPIUpdated May 25, 2023

The Risk Factor and Outcome of Transient Incontinence After Prostate Enucleation Surgery

An observational study in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and Incontinence, sponsored by National Taiwan University Hospital. Status unknown at 1 site in Taiwan. Open to male participants aged 40 Years to 90 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-05-25.

Sponsored by National Taiwan University Hospital · Observational

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Oct 2022), so the status shown — last known as Recruiting — may be out of date.
Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
330
Ages
40 Years to 90 Years
Sex
Male
01

Study summary

Lower urinary tract symptoms caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are the most common urological problem among men. monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), in which the enlarged prostate tissue is resected piece by piece using a monopolar electrode, has been the gold standard since the 1970s. It can substantially improve the maximal flow rate (Qmax), urinary symptoms (International Prostate Symptom Score, IPSS), and health-related quality of life (QOL), with long-term efficacy compared to medications or other minimally invasive treatments.4 5 However, monopolar TURP is a risky procedure because of the likelihood of severe complications such as massive bleeding or transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome.6 Therefore, it is of paramount importance to develop minimally invasive surgical techniques with outcomes similar to those of monopolar TURP, but with fewer side effects. Therefore, new energy system with different surgical methods developed after 2000s. Among all, Enucleation methods was proved to have better Qmax and IPSS after surgery than vaporization and resection methods. However, the risk of short-term transient incontinence was higher in enucleation than in resection methods.

Hence modified methods such as upside down, apical preservation methods, defining the limits of dissection proximal to external sphincter prior to enucleation of prostate were developed in order to reduce transient incontinence. Besides, the necessity of preoperative urodynamic study and biofeedback training, investigate the risk factors of transient incontinence are important issues. The study using prospective cohort design recruit 300 BPH patient receiving enucleation methods. To investigate the risk factors of transient incontinence and establish model to predict the incontinence. Besides we will evaluate different surgical methods and treatment methods to improve transient incontinence and the long-term results of different enucleation methods.

Read the detailed description

Lower urinary tract symptoms caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are the most common urological problem among men. Approximately one-third of men over the age of 50 are affected by this problem. Surgical intervention is the most effective treatment for BPH, with around 100,000 procedures carried out annually in the United States. Of all surgical treatments, monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), in which the enlarged prostate tissue is resected piece by piece using a monopolar electrode, has been the gold standard since the 1970s. It can substantially improve the maximal flow rate (Qmax), urinary symptoms (International Prostate Symptom Score, IPSS), and health-related quality of life (QOL), with long-term efficacy compared to medications or other minimally invasive treatments. However, monopolar TURP is a risky procedure because of the likelihood of severe complications such as massive bleeding or transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to develop minimally invasive surgical techniques with outcomes similar to those of monopolar TURP, but with fewer side effects.

Since the 2000s, new energy systems for BPH surgical interventions quickly became popular, including systems that use bipolar energy and various laser systems, such as the holmium laser, potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) laser, thulium laser, and diode laser. The trend in BPH surgical therapy has shifted from monopolar TURP to laser therapies and bipolar TURP over the past 10 years. Bipolar energy can be used to incise, resect, and vaporize prostate tissue using different electrodes. Holmium and thulium laser beams are mainly absorbed by water and act as incisional lasers. The KTP laser is selectively absorbed by hemoglobin and debulks prostate tissue through vaporization. The diode laser is absorbed by water and hemoglobin can therefore vaporize and incise prostate tissue. These new methods all use normal saline instead of distilled water to avoid hyponatremia. They can be further divided into three types according to their treatment principles: resection methods (resection of prostate tissue piece by piece), vaporization methods (vaporization of excessive prostate tissue), and enucleation methods (peeling the enlarged prostate from the prostate capsule).

Enucleation methods was proved to have better Qmax and IPSS after surgery than vaporization and resection methods. In a network meta-analysis, enucleation methods, including bipolar enucleation of prostate , holmium, thulium, and diode laser enucleation of prostate, yielded greater Qmax values at 6-12-months after surgery than did the resection and vaporization methods, and the difference could still be observed at 24-36 months after treatment. The advantages of the enucleation over vaporization methods were mainly observed in large prostates. Enucleation methods also achieved better IPSS than resection and vaporization methods, although the difference was not statistically significant. The new methods were generally safer than monopolar TURP. They were less likely to require patient transfusion, cause blood clot tamponade, lead to postoperative hemoglobin decline, or cause TUR syndrome.

However, the risk of short-term transient incontinence was higher in enucleation than in resection methods. Compared with resection methods, enucleation methods had more events of short-term transient urinary incontinence than resection methods. (odds ratio (OR)=1.91, 95% Confidence interval (CI); 1.35 to 2.71) Liu et al compared bipolar enucleation with bipolar TURP and found that after Foley removal, the incontinence rate was higher in enucleation than in resection at 24 hours (35.6 % vs 18.9%, p\<0.01) and one week (20% vs 7.8%, p\<0.05).28 There was no difference after two weeks postoperatively (3.3% vs 2.2 % at 2 weeks).

Xu et al retrospectively reviewed 1288 patient receiving bipolar enucleation and found that older age and large prostate volume were associated with postoperative stress urinary incontinence. Besides, operation time and blood loss were also reported as risk factors.

Hence many authors used modified methods such as upside down, apical preservation methods, defining the limits of dissection proximal to external sphincter prior to enucleation, in order to reduce postoperative urinary incontinence. Besides pelvic floor exercise was demonstrated to shorten the periods of stress urinary incontinence. However, the role of pelvic floor exercise in enucleation methods in BPH patients are unclear. These questions need further investigations.

6、study aim: To investigate the risk factors of transient incontinence and establish model to predict the incontinence. Besides we will evaluate different surgical methods and treatment methods to improve transient incontinence and the long-term results of different enucleation methods.

7、material and methods: I. study design: prospective cohort study II. . We plan to invite 300 patients whom received enucleation (laser or bipolar) surgery for BPH during 2020 march to 2022 march in National Taiwan University Hospital yun-lin branch to participate this study. We adopted usual care and collect patient's preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative data. The preoperative data include age, comorbidities, medication history, urodynamic parameters and urinary questionnaire. Intraoperative data include operative methods, operative time and surgical complications. Postoperative parameters include urinary questionnaire such as International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-SF), 4-time use pad questionnaire, IPSS, 7-item Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) and urodynamic parameters.

III. Outcome measure

  1. Maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) Prostate volume (TRUSP) , post-voiding residual urine (PVR ) at baseline, 3, 6, 12, and 24-month follow-up visits, pressure-flow study at baseline if indicated.
  2. If incontinence and using pad, then biofeedback, ICIQ-SF, 4-item use pad questionnaire every week until incontinence cured. and different type of urinary incontinence such as stress UI, urge UI, total incontinence, mixed incontinence et al
  3. IPSS, OABSS instruments, flow, TRUSP and PVR will be scored per instructions for each instrument collected at baseline and at baseline, 3, 6, 12, and 24-month follow-up visits
  4. Pre-operative parameters: Age, BMI, comorbidities (DM, Hypertension, heart disease, neurologic disease), anal tone (DRESS), PSA
  5. Op parameters: op methods (original en blcok or anterioposterio dissection, preserve 11-1 ocolock) enucleation and morcellation time, catheterization duration,
  6. Complication: using modified clavien-dindo classification grade 1-4
02

Conditions studied

  • Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
  • Incontinence

Keywords

  • transient incontinence,TURP
03

In context

Prostatic Hyperplasia

783 studies on the registry are indexed under Prostatic Hyperplasia; 174 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 330 is above the median of 214 across 167 observational studies indexed under Prostatic Hyperplasia.

Browse Prostatic Hyperplasia studies →

Lead sponsor

National Taiwan University Hospital is the lead sponsor of 2,563 studies on the registry; 569 are open to participants now.

Of its 11 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 2 (18%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
40 Years to 90 Years
Sexes eligible
Male
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

BPH patients need surgical treatment

Inclusion criteria

  • Subject has diagnosis of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement causing bladder outlet obstruction
  • Clinical investigator has documented in the subject's medical record that in his/her judgment the subject is a surgical candidate
  • Subject is 40 to 90 years of age
  • Subject has an IPSS score greater than or equal to 12 measured at the baseline visit
  • Subject has medical record documentation of a maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) less than 15ml/s
  • Subject is classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I, II or III

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria:

  • Subject has a life expectancy of less than 2 years
  • Subject has an active infection (eg, urinary tract infection or prostatitis)
  • Subject has a diagnosis of, or has received treatment for, chronic prostatitis or -chronic pelvic pain syndrome (eg, non-bacterial chronic prostatitis)
  • Subject has been diagnosed with a urethral stricture or bladder neck contracture
  • Subject has history of lower urinary tract surgery (eg, TURP, laser, urinary diversion, artificial urinary sphincter, penile prosthesis)
  • Subject has diagnosis of stress urinary incontinence that requires treatment or daily pad/device use
  • Subject has diagnosis of prostate cancer and receive cancer treatment
  • Subject has a history of carcinoma in situ (CIS), Ta Grade 2, Ta Grade 3 or any T1 stage bladder cancer
05

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
330 participants (estimated)
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change of postoperative incontinence from baseline to postoperative 6 months asses by iciq-SF

    change of incontinence severity after operation

    Time frame: post-op 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 1 month, 2 month, 3 month and 6 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change of postoperative incontinence from baseline to postoperative 6 months asses by 4-item pad questionnaire

    change of pad usage after operation

    Time frame: post-op 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, 1 month, 2 month, 3 month and 6 months

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • National Taiwan University Hospital
    Chiayi City, 632, Taiwan
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Wei JT, Calhoun E, Jacobsen SJ. Urologic diseases in America project: benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2005 Apr;173(4):1256-61. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000155709.37840.fe. PubMed 15758764 ↗
  • Malaeb BS, Yu X, McBean AM, Elliott SP. National trends in surgical therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia in the United States (2000-2008). Urology. 2012 May;79(5):1111-6. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.11.084. PubMed 22546389 ↗
  • Reich O, Seitz M, Gratzke C, Schlenker B, Walther S, Stief C. [Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) : Surgical therapy options]. Urologe A. 2010 Jan;49(1):113-26. doi: 10.1007/s00120-009-2183-1. German. PubMed 20033128 ↗
  • Lourenco T, Pickard R, Vale L, Grant A, Fraser C, MacLennan G, N'Dow J; Benign Prostatic Enlargement team. Minimally invasive treatments for benign prostatic enlargement: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2008 Oct 9;337:a1662. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1662. PubMed 18845591 ↗
  • Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Seitz M, Schlenker B, Hermanek P, Lack N, Stief CG; Urology Section of the Bavarian Working Group for Quality Assurance. Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol. 2008 Jul;180(1):246-9. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.058. Epub 2008 May 21. PubMed 18499179 ↗
  • Issa MM. Technological advances in transurethral resection of the prostate: bipolar versus monopolar TURP. J Endourol. 2008 Aug;22(8):1587-95. doi: 10.1089/end.2008.0192. PubMed 18721041 ↗
  • Liu JF, Liu CX, Tan ZH, Li SX, Li XZ, Chi N. [Transurethral bipolar plasmakinetic enucleation and resection versus transurethral bipolar plasmakinetic resection of the prostate for BPH: a randomized controlled trial on the incidence of postoperative urinary incontinence]. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2014 Feb;20(2):165-8. Chinese. PubMed 24520671 ↗
  • Xu N, Chen SH, Xue XY, Wei Y, Zheng QS, Li XD, Huang JB, Cai H, Sun XL, Lin YZ. Older Age and Larger Prostate Volume Are Associated with Stress Urinary Incontinence after Plasmakinetic Enucleation of the Prostate. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:6923290. doi: 10.1155/2017/6923290. Epub 2017 Mar 30. PubMed 28466017 ↗
  • Nam JK, Kim HW, Lee DH, Han JY, Lee JZ, Park SW. Risk Factors for Transient Urinary Incontinence after Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate. World J Mens Health. 2015 Aug;33(2):88-94. doi: 10.5534/wjmh.2015.33.2.88. Epub 2015 Aug 19. PubMed 26331125 ↗
  • Goode PS, Burgio KL, Johnson TM 2nd, Clay OJ, Roth DL, Markland AD, Burkhardt JH, Issa MM, Lloyd LK. Behavioral therapy with or without biofeedback and pelvic floor electrical stimulation for persistent postprostatectomy incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2011 Jan 12;305(2):151-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1972. PubMed 21224456 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided — need irb approval

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 25, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05116592
Lead sponsor
National Taiwan University Hospital
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 11, 2021
Start date
Apr 1, 2020
Primary completion
Jun 2, 2023 (estimated)
Completion
Jun 2, 2024 (estimated)
Last update
May 25, 2023

Study contacts

Shiwei Haung, PHD
Contact
y04186@ms1.ylh.gov.tw
0972655725
Shiwei Haung, MDPHD
principal investigator · National Taiwan University Hospital, Yun-Lin Branch

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Oct 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion