I was wondering how to respond without going off on one. I'll try to keep calm.
Here I am, four years down the line from LRP, where a substantial amount of nerve preservation was done, but still leaking like a sieve. However, I know exactly what the problem is, and it has nothing to do with nerves, doing or not doing PFEs, drinking, or not drinking red wine, or even the type of surgery. Because of my prior TURP, my surgeon (who is one of the top five in the country) had one hell of a job to join up what remained of my bladder neck to the new end of my urethra, leading to some distortion around the external sphincter. For a while, it looked as though it would seal despite the distortion, but no luck so far.
I'm afraid this study looks rather like someone deciding what they would like to find, and then looking for data to support the premise. It's a bit like the "Air is bad for you because all the people who breathe die eventually" study.
Honestly, there are so many variables affecting recovery from prostatectomy that only a really comprehensive study covering tens of thousands of men is likely to come up with any valid correlations. The lower urinary tract seems to be so delicately balanced that almost anything can upset it. As I have mentioned before, I see the situation as being similar to that of the twin carburettors on my Triumph Dolomite. Once they had gone out of adjustment from the factory setting, no amount of expert attention could ever keep them in tune for more than a month at a time.
There, rant over, Statisticians, please feel free to correct my premise.
And, now after two years or so, I'm still waiting to see a consultant about an AUS, but that's another story.