Effectiveness of Pelvic Floor Muscle Training Alone and in Combination With Biofeedback, Electrical Stimulation, or Both Compared to Control for Urinary Incontinence in 
Men Following Prostatectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background. The efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) alone and in combination with biofeedback (BFB), electrical stimulation (ES), or both for urinary incontinence in men following prostatectomy is inconclusive. Purpose. The purpose of this study was to determine whether PFMT works well alone or in combination with BFB, ES, or both in comparison with a control. Data Sources. The databases Ovid Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science, and the specialized register of the Cochrane Incontinence Review Group were searched from study inception to August 2017. Abstract proceedings from urological meetings, including the European Association of Urology and the American Urological Association, were also searched. Study Selection. Randomized controlled trials that compared PFMT alone and PFMT with ES, BFB, or both and no treatment, placebo, or sham were included in the review. Data Extraction, Synthesis, and Quality. Two independent reviewers completed data extraction and quality appraisal. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool was used for quality appraisal. Meta-analysis was done with software used for preparing and maintaining Cochrane reviews. Limitations. Methodological flaws in the included studies limited internal validity. Conclusions. PFMT alone, PFMT plus BFB and ES, and PFMT plus ES were more effective than the control for urinary incontinence following prostatectomy. The effect of PFMT plus BFB on postprostatectomy incontinence remains uncertain.