METHODS: This was a retrospective study of women with pelvic organ prolapse who underwent LSC from January 2013 to January 2016 in a tertiary center. Urinary function was clinically evaluated using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form (ICIQ-SF), the Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS) and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory Questionnaire- - Short Form 20 (PFDI-20). Urodynamic assessment was performed before and 6 months after surgery. The Wilcoxon signed-ranks test and the McNemar test were applied with p lower P det Q max, increased voided volume and reduced postvoid residual urine volume). Clinically, there was a significant increase after LSC in stress urinary incontinence and a significant reduction in urgency urinary incontinence, overactive bladder and voiding dysfunction.
CONCLUSIONS: Apart from increased stress urinary incontinence, there was an improvement in overall urinary function in terms of patient-reported symptoms and urodynamics, despite deep vesicovaginal space dissection. Hence, LSC is a viable surgical option for pelvic organ prolapse, restoring both level 1 and level 2 support without detrimental effects on urinary function.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of men aged above 40 years with no history of prostate cancer, prostate surgery, or 5α-reductase inhibitor treatment. Serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and total PV were measured in each subject. Potential sociodemographic and clinical variables including age, weight, comorbidities, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) were collected. Of 1034 subjects, 837 were used in building the PV calculator using regression analysis. The remaining 1/5 (n = 197) was used for model validation.
RESULTS: There were 1034 multiethnic Asian men (Chinese 52.9%, Malay 35.4%, and Indian 11.7%) with mean age of 60 ± 7.6 years. Average PV was 29.4 ± 13.0 mL while the overall mean of PSA was 1.7 ± 1.7 ng/mL. We identified age, IPSS, weight, and PSA (all P
MATERIALS/METHODS: Multivariable models developed to predict atomised and generalised urinary symptoms, both acute and late, were considered for validation using a dataset representing 754 participants from the TROG 03.04-RADAR trial. Endpoints and features were harmonised to match the predictive models. The overall performance, calibration and discrimination were assessed.
RESULTS: 14 models from four publications were validated. The discrimination of the predictive models in an independent external validation cohort, measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, ranged from 0.473 to 0.695, generally lower than in internal validation. 4 models had ROC >0.6. Shrinkage was required for all predictive models' coefficients ranging from -0.309 (prediction probability was inverse to observed proportion) to 0.823. Predictive models which include baseline symptoms as a feature produced the highest discrimination. Two models produced a predicted probability of 0 and 1 for all patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Predictive models vary in performance and transferability illustrating the need for improvements in model development and reporting. Several models showed reasonable potential but efforts should be increased to improve performance. Baseline symptoms should always be considered as potential features for predictive models.