loading page

COMPARISON OF PAIN, QUALITY OF LIFE, LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOMS AND SEXUAL FUNCTION BETWEEN FLEXIBLE AND RIGID CYSTOSCOPY IN FOLLOW-UP MALE PATIENTS WITH NON MUSCLE INVASIVE BLADDER CANCER: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CROSS SECTION SINGLE BLIND STUDY
  • +1
  • Oktay Ucer,
  • Gokhan Temeltas,
  • Bilal Gumus,
  • Talha Muezzinoglu
Oktay Ucer
Author Profile
Gokhan Temeltas
Celal Bayar University
Author Profile
Bilal Gumus
Celal Bayar University
Author Profile
Talha Muezzinoglu
Celal Bayar University
Author Profile

Abstract

Objectives: To compare pain, quality of life(QoL), sexual function and lower urinary tract symptoms(LUTS) between rigid(RC) and flexible cystoscopy(FC). Methods: Forty-one patients who were planned control cystoscopies were enrolled the study. At the first cystoscopy, 20 patients(Group 1) and other 21 patients(Group 2) were performed by using flexible(15,5Fr) and rigid cystoscope(15,5Fr), respectively. At the second cystoscopies, the patients in group 1 and group 2 were performed by using rigid and flexible cystosacope, respectively. In all the patients, pain was measured with visual pain scale(VPS) shortly after cystoscopy. Also SF, QoL and LUTS were assessed by using IIEF, SF-36 and MLUTS forms, respectively. Results: While 22 of the patients preferred FC, the other 19 preferred RC(p>0,05). There were no statistically differences between VPS, IIEF, SF-36 and MLUTS scores of the two groups. In multivariate analysis regarding quality of life, although sexual function, pain and cystoscopy type did not affect QoL, voiding symptoms affected independently QoL. After the both cystoscopy type, IIEF, SF-36 and MLUTS scores did not change statistically. Conclusion: The results showed that the effects on pain, sexual function, QoL and LUTS of RC and FC were similar. In general, cystoscopy did not affect negatively on QoL, sexual function and LUTS of the patients.

Peer review status:Published

08 Nov 2020Submitted to International Journal of Clinical Practice
15 Nov 2020Assigned to Editor
15 Nov 2020Submission Checks Completed
16 Nov 2020Reviewer(s) Assigned
19 Nov 2020Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
20 Nov 2020Editorial Decision: Accept
18 Dec 2020Published in International Journal of Clinical Practice. 10.1111/ijcp.13853