Effect of vesicourethral anastomosis technique on functional results in retropubic radical prostatectomy

被引:0
|
作者
Kizilay, Fuat [1 ]
Kalemci, Serdar [1 ]
Simsir, Adnan [1 ]
机构
[1] Ege Univ Hosp, Dept Urol, Izmir, Turkey
关键词
EARLY CONTINENCE; INCONTINENCE; SUTURES; NUMBER;
D O I
10.1111/ijcp.14460
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aim We aimed to compare the functional results of two different vesicourethral anastomosis (VUA) techniques used in open retropubic radical prostatectomy. Methods A total of 476 patients including the first group with four-focus VUA at 12-, 3-, 6-, and 9-o'clock positions (n = 288) and the second group with six-focus VUA at 12-, 2-, 4-, 6-, 8-, and 10-o'clock (n = 188) were included in the study. Perioperative data, erectile function, and continence status over a 12-month period were compared. Results Demographic and perioperative data were similar between two groups. The number of patients with VUA stricture in the first group was significantly higher those in the second group (5.1% vs 3.2%, P = .017). The mean time to stricture development was also shorter in the first group (48.9 vs 74.3 days, P = .002). The number of continent patients at the 6th and 12th months were higher in the second group (79.3% vs 62.8%, P < .001; 92.4% vs 81.3%, P = .032, respectively). There was no significant difference between two groups in terms of the number of potent patients (P = .194 for 6 months and P = .351 for 12 months). Conclusions Better continence results can be provided with the six-focus VUA technique compared with the four-focus technique. The number of anastomotic sutures in VUA may affect functional results and can be a determinative factor for surgeons who focus on functional results as well as oncological results.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Vesicourethral anastomosis including rhabdosphincter in retropubic radical prostatectomy: Technique and results
    Topaktas, Ramazan
    Urkmez, Ahmet
    Kutluhan, Musab Ali
    Basibuyuk, Ismail
    Onol, Sinasi Yavuz
    ARCHIVIO ITALIANO DI UROLOGIA E ANDROLOGIA, 2018, 90 (04) : 249 - 253
  • [2] A simple technique for vesicourethral anastomosis in retropubic radical prostatectomy
    Mimata, H
    Kasagi, Y
    Sakamoto, S
    Nomura, Y
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 1998, 61 (04) : 232 - 234
  • [3] Radical retropubic prostatectomy: Vesicourethral anastomosis
    Herranz-Amo, F.
    ACTAS UROLOGICAS ESPANOLAS, 2020, 44 (06): : 423 - 429
  • [4] Reducing the Number of Sutures for Vesicourethral Anastomosis in Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy
    Mazaris, Evangelos M.
    Chatzidarellis, Eleftherios
    Varkarakis, Ioannis M.
    Dellis, Athanasios
    Deliveliotis, Charalambos
    INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2009, 35 (02): : 158 - 163
  • [5] Running suture for vesicourethral anastomosis in minilaparotomy radical retropubic prostatectomy
    Miki, T
    Okihara, K
    Ukimura, O
    Usijima, S
    Yoneda, K
    Mizutani, Y
    Kawauchi, A
    Koga, M
    Takeyama, M
    UROLOGY, 2006, 67 (02) : 410 - 412
  • [6] Initial results using a running vesicourethral anastomosis following open radical retropubic prostatectomy
    Harpster, Lewis E.
    Brien, James
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2007, 177 (01): : 118 - 122
  • [7] Vesicourethral reconstruction in radical retropubic prostatectomy: An alternative technique
    Igel, TC
    Wehle, MJ
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1999, 161 (03): : 844 - 846
  • [8] Radiographic characteristics of the vesicourethral anastomosis after radical retropubic and perineal prostatectomy
    Stracener, J
    Schow, DA
    Renfer, L
    Rozanski, TA
    Thompson, IM
    MILITARY MEDICINE, 1998, 163 (03) : 174 - 176
  • [9] Novel technique of Vest suture vesicourethral anastomosis in a morbidly obese patient undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy
    Kamerer, A
    Basler, J
    Thompson, I
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2003, 170 (01): : 174 - 174
  • [10] Vesicourethral anastomosis during radical retropubic prostatectomy:: Does the number of sutures matter?
    Gallo, Luigi
    Perdona, Sisto
    Autorino, Riccardo
    Menna, Luigi
    Claudio, Luigi
    Marra, Luigi
    Di Lorenzo, Giuseppe
    Gallo, Antonio
    UROLOGY, 2007, 69 (03) : 547 - 551