Retrospective chart review reveals 80% improvement in continence for male patients with PPI receiving Bulkamid adjunct treatment.
Background/Objectives: Bulkamid® (Axonics, Irvine, CA, USA) is a non-particulate polyacrylamide hydrogel used in the treatment of urinary incontinence. While its effectiveness is well-documented in female stress urinary incontinence (SUI), there is limited data on its role in male stress urinary incontinence, particularly post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI). This study evaluates the efficacy of Bulkamid as a primary or adjunctive treatment for male PPI. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on male patients who developed PPI and underwent Bulkamid injections between 2016 and 2021. Data collected included pre- and post-procedure pad usage, the volume of Bulkamid injected, prior and subsequent incontinence treatments, and patient-reported satisfaction. Bulkamid was injected transurethrally in four quadrants near the vesicourethral anastomosis using a rigid cystoscope. Results: Twenty-one men with a history of radical prostatectomy (six open and fifteen robotic), including four who received adjuvant radiotherapy, were included. Fifteen underwent Bulkamid injection as a primary treatment, with five (33%) requiring repeat injections due to initial improvement. Eight (54%) subsequently underwent an AdVance XP® sling placement, while two (13%) required no further treatment. Six patients received Bulkamid as an adjunct to prior incontinence surgery, with 80% of post-sling patients reporting improved continence. Bulkamid was less effective in men with detrusor overactivity or prior radiation. Conclusions: Bulkamid demonstrated a higher success rate as an adjunct to the AdVance XP sling, with 80% of men experiencing improved continence. As a primary treatment for PPI, success was modest, with only 33% achieving improvement, often requiring repeat injections or conversion to a sling. Bulkamid presents a low-risk option for select male PPI patients, particularly those with prior sling placement, but durability and long-term effectiveness remain concerns.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Plagakis et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: