The National History of Continence and Incontinence Post-P
Research type
Research Study
Full title
The National History of Continence and Incontinence Post - Robotic Radical Prostatectomy
IRAS ID
61445
Contact name
Nikesh Thiruchelvam
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Addenbrookes
Duration of Study in the UK
11 years, 2 months, 3 days
Research summary
Almost 10% of men undergoing a radical prostatectomy (ie an operation where the prostate is removed because it contains cancer) suffer urinary incontinence at one year as a complication of their operation. Treatment at one year following removal of the prostate includes surgical placement of an artificial urinary sphincter or male sling.
The exact cause for developing urinary incontinence following surgery remains unknown. Theories include damage to the muscle or nerves supplying the urinary sphincter (a circular ring of muscle that sits in the waterpipe and causes continence), and/or damage to the pelvic floor, which loosely describes muscles and ligaments that support the pelvic organs within their normal position within the pelvis. It is also unknown what factors before surgery contribute to an increased chance of developing urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy.
The purpose of this study is to primarily examine what happens in the first year after surgery in the male pelvis, specifically at the pelvic floor and male urethral sphincter. To do this, we shall use ultrasound in the area behind the scrotum (the perineum). This method is a standard imaging technique performed by a Consultant Radiologist, it is non-invasive and uses no radiation. This method is very accurate at looking at the areas of interest in the male pelvic floor without causing distress or discomfort to the patient. We would aim to scan patients once before surgery, and then every three months after surgery for one year. By doing this, we hope to map out how the pelvic floor and sphincter recover after surgery and perhaps, also determine what factors in some patients lead to incontinence following surgery.
REC name
East Midlands - Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
20/EM/0254
Date of REC Opinion
20 Oct 2020
REC opinion
Unfavourable Opinion