To assess baseline clinical and urodynamic profiles of a contemporary cohort of men undergoing radical prostatectomy as part of the ROSE study. Methods: Men with localised prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy were prospectively recruited to undergo clinical assessment and urodynamic testing prior to surgery as part of a clinical trial. Results: 85 men with median age 64.5 years and median PSA 6.3 ng/ml were prospectively recruited. Of patients with complete baseline data, 36(50.7%), 28(39.4%) and 7(9.9%) had mild (IPSS <8), moderate (IPSS 8-19) and severe (IPSS>20) LUTS. Obstruction was identified in 18 (29.5%) men and 9 (14.8%) showed detrusor underactivity. Of 15 patients with detrusor overactivity, 12(80%) reported OAB. Of men with urodynamic obstruction, 5 (31.3%), 10(62.5%) and 1(6.3%) reported mild, moderate and severe LUTS. Of men without OAB, 4 (11.8%, p=0.002) showed filling phase abnormalities, 13 (46.4%, p=0.611) had flow rates < 15ml/s and 7 (30.4%, p=0.767) were obstructed. Of men with mild or absent LUTS, 5 (20%, p=0.072) were obstructed and 4 (16%, p=0.524) showed poor contractility. Conclusion: LUTS and OAB are common in men with localised prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. Detrusor overactivity and urodynamic filling phase abnormalities are strongly correlated with OAB. IPSS did not correlate well with bladder outflow obstruction or detrusor underactivity. Urodynamic filling abnormalities were found in 11.8% of men without OAB. Symptomatic and functional assessment may therefore have a role in the preoperative counselling of patients and possibly guide post-operative management of LUTS especially if OAB is present.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.