OBJECTIVES: Stress urinary incontinence alter radical prostatectomy is one of 
the most worrisome sequelae for the patient and urologist. The aim of this paper 
is to evaluate the indications of the suburethral mesh Invance, giving details 
on our preoperative evaluation and indication, surgical technique, and the 
correlation between preoperative findings and functional results.
METHODS: Between February 2006 and January 2009 27 patients underwent surgery. 
All of them had more than one year of follow up after prostatectomy, urodynamic 
study and preoperative cystoscopy. Continence was evaluated by the number of 
pads/day and the ICIQ-UI SF questionnaire. Through a perineal incision three 
titanium screws with a polipropylene suture were inserted in each ischiopubic 
rami, and a silicon/polipropylene mesh (Invance) is affixed to them, compressing 
the bulbar urethra. Patients were divided into two groups: good prognosis (1-2 
pads/day without urodynamic anomalies in the filling phase) and bad prognosis (3 
pads/day, history of radiotherapy or bladder neck incision, and urodynamic 
anomalies). Cure was defined as a patient not needing pads, and improvement was 
defined as decrease in the number of pads per day.
RESULTS: Median follow up after Invance was 18 months (4-38). Nine patients used 
one pad/day, 10 used two, and eight used three pads /day. Six cases had 
underwent previous bladder neck incision and three radiotherapy. Globally, 20 
patients (74% ) were cured and five (19% ) had improved. Cure rate was 100% in 
the good prognosis group and 61% in the bad prognosis group (p=0.03). No 
intraoperative complications were registered. During the immediate postoperative 
period,one patient required cystostomy tube for 10 days. Seven patients (26% ) 
presented perineal discomfort; neither de novo urgency nor urethral erosion nor 
sling explants due to infection were registered.
CONCLUSIONS: Invance is a safe technique that guarantees a high continence rate 
in selected patients. It is a reproducible operation and, with a midterm follow 
up, no loss of continence has been observed, and the risk of urethral erosion is 
null in our experience. Patients with mild-moderate incontinence, without 
urodynamic anomalies nor previous radiotherapy are the ideal candidates.