[Predictive value of the penile cuff-test for the assessment of bladder outlet obstruction in men]

Can the Penile Cuff Test Predict the Outcome of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Obstruction?

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the penile cuff test can predict surgical outcomes prior to Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for benign prostatic obstruction.

METHODS

Men scheduled to undergo Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate were enrolled in this study, and all patients underwent the penile cuff test prior to and 3 months after surgery. Patients were categorized as obstructed, nonobstructed, or uncertain by nomogram. Surgical outcomes were assessed by evaluating changes in their international prostate symptom score, quality of life index, and maximum flow rate preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. The proportion of patients with good outcomes was compared among nomogram-classified groups, and postoperative changes in position on the nomogram were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients were analyzed. After surgery, the overall treatment efficacy and symptomatic treatment efficacy were not different between obstructed and nonobstructed patients. However, the maximum flow rate and quality of life score were significantly higher after surgery in obstructed patients compared to nonobstructed patients. After surgery, 75.7% of patients with obstruction and 63.6% of patients categorized as uncertain for obstruction transitioned to the nonobstructed group, while 77.3% of nonobstructed patients remained in the nonobstructed group.

CONCLUSION

The penile cuff test can be used in patients with bladder outlet obstruction to predict good functional outcome and improved quality of life following treatment with Holmium laser enucleation. After Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate, the majority of patients were classified as nonobstructed.

The role of noninvasive penile cuff test in patients with bladder outlet obstruction

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the penile cuff test (PCT) and standard pressure-flow study (PFS) in patients with bladder outlet obstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 58 male patients with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were selected. Seven patients were excluded; thus, 51 patients were finally enrolled. Each of the patients underwent a PCT and a subsequent PFS. The sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and likelihood ratio were calculated. Chi-square and Fisher exact test were used to evaluate relationships between PCT results and maximal urine flow (Qmax); a p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The mean (±standard deviation) age of the study group was 65.5±10.4 years. Overall, by use of the PCT, 24 patients were diagnosed as being obstructed and 27 patients as unobstructed. At the subsequent PFS, 16 of the 24 patients diagnosed as obstructed by the PCT were confirmed to be obstructed, 4 were diagnosed as unobstructed, and the remaining 4 patients appeared equivocal. Of the 27 patients shown to be unobstructed by the PCT, 25 were confirmed to not be obstructed by PFS, with 13 equivocal and 12 unobstructed. Two patients were diagnosed as being obstructed. For detecting obstruction, the PCT showed an SE of 88.9% and an SP of 75.7%. The PPV was 66.7% and the NPV was 93%.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCT is a beneficial test for evaluating patients with LUTS. In particular, this instrument has an acceptable ability to reject obstruction caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Correlation between penile cuff test and pressure-flow study in patients candidates for trans-urethral resection of prostate

Background

Aim of this study was to make a comparison between penile cuff test (PCT) and standard pressure-flow study (PFS) in the preoperative evaluation of patients candidates for trans-urethral resection of prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

Methods

We enrolled male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms candidates for TURP. Each of them underwent a PCT and a subsequent PFS. A statistical analysis was performed: sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), likelihood ratio and ratio of corrected classified were calculated. Fisher exact test was used to evaluate relationships between PCT and maximal urine flow (Q_max): a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

We enrolled 48 consecutive patients. Overall, at PCT 31 patients were diagnosed as obstructed and 17 patients as unobstructed. At the subsequent PFS, 21 out of 31 patients diagnosed as obstructed at PCT were confirmed to be obstructed; one was diagnosed as unobstructed; the remaining 9 patients appeared as equivocal. Concerning the 17 patients unobstructed at PCT, all of them were confirmed not to be obstructed at PFS, with 10 equivocal and 7 unobstructed. The rate of correctly classified patients at PCT was 79% (95%-CI 65%-90%). About detecting obstructed patients, PCT showed a SE of 100% and a SP of 63%. The PPV was 68%, while the NPV was 100%.

Conclusions

PCT can be an efficient tool in evaluating patients candidates for TURP. In particular, it showed good reliability in ruling out BPO because of its high NPV, with a high rate of correctly classified patients overall. Further studies on a huger number of patients are needed, including post-operative follow-up as well.

Application of guidelines to the evaluation of the male patient with urgency and/or incontinence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review and evaluate the evidence from contemporary evidence-based guidelines regarding the assessment of men with urinary urgency and/or incontinence.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are a number of evidence-based guidelines which describe the pathways for assessing men with the symptoms of urgency and/or incontinence. We summarize the conclusions of the European Association of Urology, American Urological Association and National Institute of Clinical Excellence guidelines.

SUMMARY

All guidelines recommend a directed history, examination (including digital rectal examination), urinalysis and bladder diary as being essential in the assessment of men with lower urinary tract symptoms, although there are no high levels of evidence studies to support this. Creatinine estimation and prostate-specific antigen are recommended in selected groups of men, the latter after appropriate counselling. Uroflowmetry with postvoid residual assessment is recommended for at specialist assessment. Pad tests may be useful to quantify leakage. Ultrasound assessment of prostatic size and protrusion into the bladder base may be useful. Cystometry is recommended for men considering prostatic surgery, although there is a poor level of evidence underpinning this. Noninvasive surrogates for cystometry, such as penile plethysmography, lack sufficient evidence to allow recommendations to be made.

Assessment of BPH/BOO

The assessment of men with bladder outflow obstruction relies on an adequate history and examination. Uroflowmetry and post-void residue estimation are very revealing and may be sufficient in the majority of men. The prostate-specific antigen test may be used to select men who are at a high risk of progression. In specific situations, cystometry may be required. We discuss the use of cystometry and the newer less-invasive methods of assessment that have emerged over the last few years, including ultrasound estimation of intravesical prostatic protrusion, prostatic urethra angle, detrusor wall thickness, ultrasound-estimated bladder weight, near-infrared spectroscopy and the condom catheter and penile cuff tests. Although these techniques show promise, they still require further modifications, standardization and testing in larger populations. In addition, they should be used in men where only specific questions need to be answered.