Anastomotic stricture (AS) following radical prostatectomy (RP) decreases patients' quality of life. It occurs in 0.5% to 32% of men after open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP), although its etiology is poorly understood. In a series of patients who received RRP, we analyzed the incidence, possible predisposing factors, and management of AS after RP.
Between April 1997 and March 2006, 129 consecutive patients underwent RRP in our hospital. Anastomosis between the bladder neck and urethra was performed with interrupted anastomosis using four 2-0 absorbable sutures. AS was diagnosed when a 16Fr. panendoscope could not be passed. We assessed the relationship between the management method for AS and time interval between the surgical procedure and diagnosis of the stricture. The relationships between comorbidities identified preoperatively (hypertension [HT], diabetes mellitus [DM], cardiovascular disease [CVD], cerebral infarction [CI] and smoking history) and the incidence of AS were determined. Risk factors, including age, body mass index [BMI], preoperative PSA, total prostate volume, operative time, blood loss, Foley duration, amount of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) per day, amount of drain output, pathological T stage, Gleason sum and surgical margin status were also assessed.
The rate of AS after RRP was 10.9% (14/129). In 10 patients (72%), AS occurred within 3 months of surgery, in 2 (14%) it occurred at 4-12 months after surgery and in 2 (14%) more than 12 months after surgery. In univariate and multivariate analyses, intraoperative bleeding of 1,800 ml or more was independently the strongest predictor of AS. In two patients a urethral bougie was used and 11 underwent internal urethrotomy. Only 1 patient underwent transurethral resection. Of the 8 patients whose strictures were diagnosed within 3 months after surgery and underwent internal urethrotomy, 6 had recurrent anastomotic strictures.
Risk factors for AS are thought to be multifactorial. Intraoperative blood loss was significantly associated with the development of anastomotic stricture. We should understand that anastomotic stricture following radical retropubic prostatectomy is not a rare morbidity and should inform patients about the possibility of postoperative AS.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To evaluate continence after radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer patients, in whom a new method of the bladder neck reconstruction (BNR) using deep dorsal stitch was implemented (deep single stitch through all bladder layers directly dorsal to the bladder opening after ″ tennis racket″ reconstruction) and to provide justification for its use by means of anatomical study in cadavers.
Open radical retropubic prostatectomy was performed in 84 patients: 39 patients with a new BNR method used to improve continence and control group of 45 patients with standard ″tennis racket″ BNR. Median follow-up was 14 months in control group and 12 months in study group. Continence recovery was accessed early postoperatively and every 3 months thereafter. Anatomical study was performed on 2 male fresh cadavers reproducing two different BNR techniques to clarify any underlying continence related mechanisms.
Patients with new BNR achieved full continence significantly faster (p=0.041), but the continence rates after 12 months were similar between groups. The severity of incontinence up to month 9 was significantly reduced in BNR group. The anastomotic stricture rate was not affected. Applying new BNR to the cadaver model revealed effects on early continence, namely presence of proximal passive closure mechanism in area of bladder neck.
Continence in patients with the new BNR method using deep dorsal stitch recovered significantly faster. Moreover, a reduced grade of residual incontinence was documented. The effect was non-significant at month 12 of follow-up, meaning that only early effect was present.
International braz j urol: official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology 05/2015; 41(3):455-65. DOI:10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.0341 · 0.88 Impact Factor
Note: This list is based on the publications in our database and might not be exhaustive.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.