CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Revista Urología Colombiana / Colombian Urology Journal 2020; 29(03): 136-140
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1697998
Original Article | Artículo Original
Functional Urology/Urologia funcional

Analysis of Correlation and Agreement between the Uroflowmetry and the International Prostate Symptom Score in Patients after retropubic Radical Prostatectomy: A Multicenter Prospective Study[*]

Análisis de correlación y concordancia entre la uroflujometría y la escala internacional de síntomas prostáticos posterior a prostatectomía radical retropúbica: estudio multicéntrico prospectivo
1   Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá DC, Colombia
,
Angie Puerto
2   Department of Urology, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá DC, Colombia
,
Alejandra Bravo
3   Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá and Universidad de los Andes School of Medicine, Bogotá DC, Colombia
,
Miguel Acuña
4   Department of Urology, Fundación Cardioinfantil, Bogotá DC, Colombia
,
Juan Sánchez
4   Department of Urology, Fundación Cardioinfantil, Bogotá DC, Colombia
,
Olga Bejarano
1   Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá DC, Colombia
,
Paula Peña
2   Department of Urology, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá DC, Colombia
,
Juan Guillermo Cataño
1   Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá DC, Colombia
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Objectives Patients undergoing retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) may suffer from lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). We aim to characterize LUTS and to evaluate the correlation and agreement between uroflowmetry and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) in patients after RRP in two reference centers.

Methods An observational multicenter prospective study was conducted between December 2015 and September 2016. Patients with at least 12-months of follow-up after RRP were included; these were evaluated with uroflowmetry and the IPSS.

Results A total of 90 patients were included. The mean follow-up was of 54.6 months (standard deviation [SD] = 27.52), and the mean age was 65 (SD = 6.85) years old. The mean IPSS was 7.41 (SD = 6.29), with 33.3% (n = 54) of the patients with moderate symptoms and 6.7% (n = 6) with severe symptoms. A total of 50% (n = 45) of the patients had normal uroflowmetry. Patients with an abnormal/equivocal result in the uroflowmetry had a mean of 9.31 (SD = 7.03) points in the IPSS versus 5.51 (SD = 4.82) in patients with a normal uroflowmetry result (p < 0.01). The level of agreement between mild versus moderate-to-severe LUTS and normal uroflowmetry versus abnormal/equivocal was 61.1% (k = 0.22, p = 0.04). We found that a score ≥ 10 in the IPSS had a level of agreement of 65.6% (k = 0.31, p = 0.0004).

Conclusions We consider that although the IPSS cannot replace uroflowmetry and vice versa, these tests are complementary and may be useful tools in the evaluation of patients with LUTS after RRP.

Resumen

Objetivos Los pacientes en quienes se realiza prostatectomía radical retropúbica (PRR) pueden sufrir de síntomas del tracto urinario inferior (STUIs). El propósito es poder caracterizar STUI y correlacionarlos con la uroflujometría y la Escala Internacional de Síntomas Prostáticos (IPSS por sus siglas en inglés).

Métodos Se realizó un estudio multicéntrico prospectivo entre Diciembre de 2015 y Septiembre de 2016. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes con un seguimiento mínimo de 12 meses después de la PRR. Estos fueron evaluados con uroflujometría e IPSS.

Resultados Se incluyeron un total de 90 pacientes. El seguimiento promedio fue de 54,6 meses (desviación estándar [DE] = 27,52), la edad promedio fue de 65 años (DE 6,85). El promedio de la puntuación en la IPSS fue de 7,41 (DE = 6,29) con 33,3% de los pacientes con síntomas moderados y 6,7% con síntomas severos. El 50% de los pacientes tuvieron una uroflujometría normal. Los pacientes con resultado anormal o equívoco en la uroflujometría presentaron un promedio de 9,31 (DE = 7,03) en la puntuación de la IPSS, versus 5,51 (DE = 4,82) en pacientes con una uroflujometría normal (p < 0,01). El nivel de concordancia entre los STUIs leves y moderados/severos y uroflujometría normal versus anormal/equívoca fue de 61,1% (k = 0,22, p = 0,04). Se encontró que un puntaje ≥ 10 en la IPSS tiene un nivel de concordancia del 65,6% (k = 0.31, p = 0.0004).

Conclusiones Se considera que aunque la IPSS no puede reemplazar la uroflujometría y viceversam, estas pruebas son complementarias, y son herramientas útiles en la evaluación de pacientes con STUIs después de la PRR.

* This work was performed at the Hospital Universitario San Ignacio and at the Fundación Cardioinfantil Urology Service, Bogotá, DC, Colombia.




Publication History

Received: 19 March 2019

Accepted: 26 July 2019

Article published online:
07 February 2020

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Sociedad Colombiana de Urología. Publicado por Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

 
  • References

  • 1 Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F. , et al. A Randomized Trial Comparing Radical Prostatectomy with Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 347 (11) 781-789 . doi:10.1056/NEJMoa012794
  • 2 Bianco FJ, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Radical prostatectomy: Long-term cancer control and recovery of sexual and urinary function (“trifecta”). Urology 2005 . doi:10.1016/j.urology.2005.06.116
  • 3 McDougal W, Wein A, Kavoussi L. , et al. Campbell-Walsh Urology Tenth Edition Review. Saunders: Elsevier; 2012
  • 4 Groutz A, Blaivas JG, Chaikin DC, Weiss JP, Verhaaren M. The pathophysiology of post-radical prostatectomy incontinence: a clinical and video urodynamic study. J Urol 2000; 163 (06) 1767-1770 . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10799178. Accessed August 5, 2018
  • 5 Song C, Lee J, Hong JH, Choo MS, Kim CS, Ahn H. Urodynamic interpretation of changing bladder function and voiding pattern after radical prostatectomy: a long-term follow-up. BJU Int 2010; 106 (05) 681-686 . doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09189.x
  • 6 Ahlering TE, Thayer KS, Sumnani D, Hovey RM, Skarecky DW. Radical prostatectomy stabilizes peak urinary flow rates. Can J Urol 2003; 10 (01) 1749-1753 . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12625853. Accessed August 5, 2018
  • 7 Gomha M, Boone T. Voiding Patterns In Patients With Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence: Urodynamic And Demographic Analysis. J Urol 2003; 169 (05) 1766-1769 . doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000059700.21764.83
  • 8 Giannantoni A, Mearini E, Zucchi A. , et al. Bladder and Urethral Sphincter Function after Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: A Prospective Long-Term Study. Eur Urol 2008; 54 (03) 657-664 . doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.10.054
  • 9 O’Leary MP. What is the AUA symptom index for BPH, and how is it used?. Contemp Urol 1994; 6 (02) 17-23 . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10151030. Accessed August 5, 2018
  • 10 Ezz El Din K, Kiemeney LALM, De Wildt MJAM, Debruyne FMJ, De La Rosette JJMCH. Correlation between uroflowmetry, prostate volume, postvoid residue, and lower urinary tract symptoms as measured by the international prostate symptom score. Urology 1996; 48 (03) 393-397 . doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00206-3
  • 11 Chancellor MB, Blaivas JG, Kaplan SA, Axelrod S. Bladder outlet obstruction versus impaired detrusor contractility: the role of outflow. J Urol 1991; 145 (04) 810-812 . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2005706. Accessed August 5, 2018
  • 12 Jarvis TR, Chan L, Tse V. Practical uroflowmetry. BJU Int 2012; 110: 28-29 . doi:10.1111/bju.11617
  • 13 Masters JG, Rice ML. Improvement in urinary symptoms after radical prostatectomy: a prospective evaluation of flow rates and symptom scores. BJU Int 2003; 91 (09) 795-797 . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12780834. Accessed August 5, 2018
  • 14 Kim JH, Ha YS, Jeong SJ, Lee DH, Kim WJ, Kim IY. Impact of Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy on Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Predictive Factors for Symptom Changes: A Longitudinal Study. Urology 2013; 81 (04) 787-793 . doi:10.1016/j.urology.2012.12.038
  • 15 Wadie BA, Ibrahim EHI, De la rosette JJ, Gomha MA, Ghoneim MA. The relationship of the international prostate symptom score and objective parameters for diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction. Part I: When statistics fail. J Urol 2001; 165 (01) 32-34 . doi:10.1097/00005392-200101000-00008
  • 16 Madersbacher S, Klingler HC, Djavan B. , et al. Is obstruction predictable by clinical evaluation in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms?. Br J Urol 1997; 80 (01) 72-77 . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9240184. Accessed August 5, 2018
  • 17 Seki N, Yunoki T, Tomoda T, Takei M, Yamaguchi A, Naito S. Association among the symptoms, quality of life and urodynamic parameters in patients with improved lower urinary tract symptoms following a transurethral resection of the prostate. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27 (03) 222-225 . doi:10.1002/nau.20466