Single center comparison of anastomotic strictures after radical perineal and radical retropubic prostatectomy

Post-prostatectomy anastomotic stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic treatment

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic procedures for treating vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) after prostatectomy, as initial VUAS management remains unclear.

METHODS

A search of the MEDLINE database, the Cochrane database, and clinicaltrials.gov was performed (last search February 2023) using the following query: (['bladder neck' OR 'vesicourethral anastomotic' OR 'anastomotic'] AND ['stricture' OR 'stenosis' OR 'contracture'] AND 'prostatectomy'). The primary outcome was the success rate of VUAS treatment, defined by the proportion (%) of patients without VUAS recurrence at the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 420 studies. After the screening, 78 reports were assessed for eligibility, and 40 studies were included in the review. The pooled characteristics of the 40 studies provided a total of 1452 patients, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) follow-up of 23.7 (13-32) months and age of 66 (64-68) years. The overall success rate (95% confidence interval [CI]) of all endoscopic procedures for VUAS treatment was 72.8% (64.4%-79.9%). Meta-regression models showed a negative influence of radiotherapy on the overall success rate (P = 0.012). After trim-and-fill (addition of 10 studies), the corrected overall success rate (95% CI) was 62.9% (53.6%-71.4%).

CONCLUSION

This first meta-analysis of endoscopic treatment success rate after VUAS reported an overall success rate of 72.8%, lowered to 62.9% after correcting for significant publication bias. This study also highlighted the need for a more thorough reporting of post-prostatectomy VUAS data to understand the treatment pathway and provide higher-quality evidence-based care.

Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes of perineoscopic radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

The aim of this study is to compare the functional, oncological, and complication outcomes of perineoscopic radical prostatectomy (PeRP) and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) operations. Patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between October 2018 and June 2020 for localized prostate cancer (N0, < T3) were retrospectively screened. After the exclusion criteria, 56 patients who underwent PeRP and 67 patients who underwent RARP remained in the study. Demographic, perioperative, and postoperative data were collected. In functional outcomes, continence and potency status were compared at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The mean age of the patients was 61.3 ± 5.9 years in the PeRP group and 62.2 ± 5.7 years in the RARP group. No statistically significant differences were present between preoperative and postoperative values. Among the perioperative findings, the mean operation time was 90.4 ± 11.2 min for the PeRP group and 114.6 ± 14.7 min for the RARP group. The operation time was shorter in the PeRP group. The average hospital stay was 2 ± 0.6 days in the PeRP group and 2.3 ± 0.5 days in the RARP group. It was significantly shorter in the PeRP group. There is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the oncological and functional results. PeRP is a surgical procedure safe in low-risk patients with medium-risk prostate cancer (PCa) who do not require lymph-node dissection. Moreover, PeRP minimizes the difficulties of perineal surgery.

Comparison of oncological, surgical, and functional outcomes between radical retropubic and radical perineal prostatectomy: A multi-institutional study

Introduction:

To investigate the safety, oncologic, surgical, and functional outcomes of RPP and RRP for localized prostate cancer (Pca), especially focusing on RPP.

Materials and methods:

From March 2005 to January 2021, we retrospectively reviewed the records of 685 patients undergoing RPP ( n = 320) or RRP ( n = 365) for localized Pca. Surgical and functional outcomes, and complications were compared. Oncological outcomes were also compared using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

Results:

A higher biochemical recurrence rate were noted in RRP than in RPP group (28.8% vs 21.6%, respectively; p = 0.03). A local recurrence was detected in a few numbers of patients (4.4%) with no statistically significant differences by surgical groups ( p = 0.71). No significant differences were observed in the cancer-specific survival and the overall survival according to the surgical approach. Positive surgical margins were similar in the two techniques. In comparison to RRP, patients undergoing RPP have less postoperative pain, decreased transfusion rate, and less catheterization time. Complete continence was achieved in 96.9% of the RPP group at 18 and 24 months versus 91.8% and 92.3% in the RRP group at 18 and 24 months, respectively ( p = 0.005 and p = 0.01, respectively). At 18 months of follow-up, the nerve-sparing technique was performed equally between the two groups, the mean of erectile function domain improved more in RPP than RRP (12.71 vs 10.42 respectively, p < 0.001). Medical and surgical complication rates were higher for RRP than RPP.

Conclusions:

RPP showed acceptable oncologic outcomes and excellent functional outcomes when compared to RRP.

Contemporary Management of Vesico-Urethral Anastomotic Stenosis After Radical Prostatectomy

Vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis is a well-known sequela after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer and has significant impact on quality of life. This review aims to summarize contemporary therapeutical approaches and to give an overview of the available evidence regarding endoscopic interventions and open reconstruction. Initial treatment may include dilation, incision or transurethral resection. In treatment-refractory stenoses, open reconstruction via an abdominal (retropubic), transperineal or combined abdominoperineal approach is a viable option with high success rates. All of the open surgical procedures are generally accompanied by a high risk of developing de novo incontinence and patients may need further interventions. In such cases, subsequent artificial urinary sphincter implantation is the most common treatment option with the best available evidence.

[Anastomosis stenosis after radical prostatectomy and bladder neck stenosis after benign prostate hyperplasia treatment: reconstructive options]

Bladder neck stenosis (BNS) after simple prostatectomy and vesicourethral anastomosis stenosis (VUAS) after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer are common sequelae. However, the two entities differ in their pathology, anatomy and their surgical results. VUAS has an incidence of 0.2-28%. Commonly, VUAS occurs within the first 2 years after surgery. Initial therapy should be performed endourologically: dilatation, (laser) incision or resection. After three unsuccessful treatment attempts, open reconstruction should be considered. Different surgical approaches (abdominal, perineal, abdominoperineal) have been described. All are associated with good success rates. However, they are accompanied by high rates of urinary incontinence. Incontinence can be treated safely by implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter. The incidence of BNS is around 5% for all types of surgery for benign prostate hyperplasia. It occurs within the first 2 years after surgery. Initial treatment should be performed endourologically. In case of recalcitrant BNS, open reconstruction is indicated. The YV-plasty is an established procedure, and the T‑plasty represents a modification. Success rates of both procedures are high. Robot-assisted reconstructive procedures have been described for both VUAS and BNS.

The evolution and resurgence of perineal prostatectomy in the robotic surgical era

PURPOSE

To review the recent advances in terms of surgical technique and new robotic platforms applied to radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP).

METHODS

A literature review was performed focusing on original articles on perineal prostatectomy searching via Medline/Pubmed and Embase. The entire spectrum was covered such as development of surgical technique including pelvic lymphadenectomy, adoption of novel surgical platforms, learning curve and future directions.

RESULTS

Surgical removal of the prostate plays a significant role on the treatment of localized prostate cancer (PCa). RPP was the first surgical approach described for radical prostatectomy. This technique declined in popularity secondary to the development of the retropubic approach. Recently, the appearance of novel robotic technology has generated renewed interest in the perineal approach.

CONCLUSION

There has been a recent resurgence on the interest of radical perineal prostatectomy for the treatment of localized PCa driven by the advent of new robotic surgical technologies into the field. Future studies are needed to better determine the learning curve of the perineal approach and its current role in the treatment of prostate cancer.

Safety and effectiveness evaluation of open reanastomosis for obliterative or recalcitrant anastomotic stricture after radical retropubic prostatectomy

Purpose:

To evaluate safety, efficacy and functional outcomes after open vesicourethral re - anastomosis using different approaches based on previous urinary continence.

Materials and Methods:

Retrospective study of patients treated from 2002 to 2017 due to vesicourethral anastomosis stricture (VUAS) post radical prostatectomy (RP) who failed endoscopic treatment with at least 3 months of follow-up. Continent and incontinent patients post RP were assigned to abdominal (AA) or perineal approach (PA), respectively. Demographic and perioperative variables were registered. Follow-up was completed with clinical interview, uroflowmetry and cystoscopy every 4 months. Success was defined as asymptomatic patients with urethral lumen that allows a 14 French flexible cystoscope.

Results:

Twenty patients underwent open re-anastomosis for VUAS after RP between 2002 and 2017. Mean age was 63.7 years (standard deviation 1.4) and median follow-up was 10 months (range 3 – 112). The approach distribution was PA 10 patients (50%) and AA 10 patients (50%). The mean surgery time and median hospital time were 246.2 ± 35.8 minutes and 4 days (range 2 – 10), respectively with no differences between approaches. No significant complication rate was found. Three patients in the AA group had gait disorder with favorable evolution and no sequels.

Estimated 2 years primary success rate was 80%. After primary procedures 89.9% remained stenosis - free. All PA patients remained incontinent, and 90% AA remained continent during follow-up.

Conclusion:

Open vesicourethral re - anastomosis treatment is a reasonable treatment option for recurrent VUAS after RP. All patients with perineal approach remained incontinent while incontinence rate in abdominal approach was rather low.

Posterior urethral stenosis after prostate cancer treatment: contemporary options for definitive management

Posterior urethral stenosis (PUS) is an uncommon but challenging problem following prostate cancer therapy. A review of the recent literature on the prevalence of PUS and treatment modalities used in the last decade was performed. A summative narrative of current accepted techniques in management of PUS is presented, and supplement with our own experience and algorithms.

An update on best practice in the diagnosis and management of post-prostatectomy anastomotic strictures

Postprostatectomy vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) remains a challenging problem for both patient and urologist. Improved surgical techniques and perioperative identification and treatment of risk factors has led to a decline over the last several decades. High-level evidence to guide management is lacking, primarily relying on small retrospective studies and expert opinion. Endourologic therapies, including dilation and transurethral incision or resection with or without adjunct injection of scar modulators is considered first-line management. Recalcitrant VUAS requires surgical reconstruction of the vesicourethral anastomosis, and in poor surgical candidates, a chronic indwelling catheter or urinary diversion may be the only option. This review provides an update in the diagnosis and management of postprostatectomy VUAS.

Differences in Recurrence Rate and De Novo Incontinence after Endoscopic Treatment of Vesicourethral Stenosis and Bladder Neck Stenosis

Objectives

The objective of this study was to compare the recurrence rate and de novo incontinence after endoscopic treatment of vesicourethral stenosis (VUS) after radical prostatectomy (RP) and for bladder neck stenosis (BNS) after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patients treated endoscopically for VUS after RP or for BNS after TURP at three German tertiary care centers between March 2009 and June 2016. Investigated endpoints were recurrence rate and de novo incontinence. Chi-squared tests and t-tests were used to model the differences between groups.

Results

A total of 147 patients underwent endoscopic therapy for VUS (59.2%) or BNS (40.8%). Mean age was 68.3 years (range 44–86), mean follow-up 27.1 months (1–98). Mean time to recurrence after initial therapy was 23.9 months (1–156), mean time to recurrence after prior endoscopic therapy for VUS or BNS was 12.0 months (1–159). Patients treated for VUS underwent significantly more often radiotherapy prior to endoscopic treatment (33.3 vs. 13.3%; p = 0.006) and the recurrence rate was significantly higher (59.8 vs. 41.7%; p = 0.031). The overall success rate of TUR for VUS was 40.2%, success rate of TUR for BNS was 58.3%. TUR for BNS is significantly more successful (p = 0.031). The mean number of TUR for BNS vs. TUR for VUS in successful cases was 1.5 vs. 1.8, which was not significantly different. The rate of de novo incontinence was significantly higher in patients treated for VUS (13.8 vs. 1.7%; p = 0.011). After excluding those patients with radiotherapy prior to endoscopic treatment, the recurrence rate did not differ significantly between both groups (60.3% for VUS vs. 44.2% for BNS; p = 0.091), whereas the rate of de novo incontinence (13.8 for VUS vs. 0% for BNS; p = 0.005) stayed significantly higher in patients treated for VUS.

Conclusion

Most patients with BNS are successfully treated endoscopically. In patients with VUS, the success rate is lower. Both stenoses differ with respect to de novo incontinence. Patients must be counseled regarding the increased risk of de novo incontinence after endoscopic treatment of VUS, independent of prior radiotherapy. Longer follow-up is warranted to address long-term outcomes.

Management of bladder neck stenosis and urethral stricture and stenosis following treatment for prostate cancer

The aim of this review is to examine all urethral strictures and stenoses subsequent to treatment for prostate cancer, including radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy, high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and cryotherapy. The overall majority respond to endoscopic treatment, including dilatation, direct visual internal urethrotomy (DVIU) or bladder neck incision (BNI). There are adjunct treatments to endoscopic management, including injections of corticosteroids and mitomycin C (MMC) and urethral stents, which remain controversial and are not currently mainstay of treatment. Recalcitrant strictures are most commonly managed with urethroplasty, while recalcitrant stenosis is relatively rare yet almost always associated with bothersome urinary incontinence, requiring bladder neck reconstruction and subsequent artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation, or urinary diversion for the devastated outlet.

Urethral strictures after radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Urethral stricture after radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer is a delicate problem as the decreased availability of tissue healing and the close relation to the sphincter complicates any surgical approach. We here review the pathophysiology, dosimetry, and the disease specific aspects of urethral strictures after radiotherapy. Moreover we discuss different treatment option such as direct vision internal urethrotomy as well as techniques for open reconstruction with and without tissue transfer.

Urethral Strictures and Stenoses Caused by Prostate Therapy

The number of patients with prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia is on the rise. As a result, the volume of prostate treatment and treatment-related complications is also increasing. Urethral strictures and stenoses are relatively common complications that require individualized management based on the length and location of the obstruction, and the patient's overall health, and goals of care. In general, less invasive options such as dilation and urethrotomy are preferred as first-line therapy, followed by more invasive substitution, flap, and anastomotic urethroplasty.

Bladder neck contracture

Bladder neck contracture (BNC) is a well-described complication of the surgical treatment of benign and malignant prostate conditions. Nevertheless, etiologies of BNC development are highly dependent on the primary treatment modality undertaken with BNC also occurring after pelvic radiation. The treatment options for BNC can range from simple, office-based dilation procedures to more invasive, complex abdomino-perineal reconstructive surgery. Although numerous strategies have been described, a patient-specific approach is usually necessary in the management of these complex patients. In this review, we highlight various therapeutic maneuvers described for the management of BNC and further delineate a tailored approach utilized at our institution in these complicated patients.

Management of the incontinent patient with a sphincteric stricture following radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The 5-year and 15-year life expectancy following the treatment of localized prostate cancer is excellent. Patients may develop rare but devastating complications following the surgery for prostate cancer. The purpose of this review is to summarize the available literature to date surrounding the management of the incontinent patient with a concomitant bladder neck contracture (BNC), or sphincteric stricture, following radical prostatectomy.

RECENT FINDINGS

The literature consists of several case series, but no clinical trials exist to provide an evidence-based approach to the incontinent patient with concomitant BNC. Fortunately, this is a relatively rare clinical scenario and most cases are successfully managed with urethral dilatation or endoscopic techniques. Multiple endoscopic techniques are available. In addition, some authors include injectable agents in their armamentarium for the treatment of BNC. Open reconstructive techniques or permanent urinary diversion may be necessary in rare cases. Both male slings and artificial urinary sphincter may be considered for the management of concomitant urinary incontinence. Some authors suggest it is safe to proceed with simultaneous artificial urinary sphincter implantation at the time of endoscopic management of the BNC.

SUMMARY

Management of the incontinent patient with concomitant BNC represents a challenging situation for the urologist. Several techniques are available to stabilize the BNC before safely proceeding with surgery for urinary incontinence. For the rare, complex case that has failed endoscopic management, referral to a surgeon experienced in reconstructive techniques is warranted.

[EVALUATION OF COMPLICATIONS OF RADICAL PERINEAL PROSTATECTOMY: EXPERIENCE OF 200 CASES]

OBJECTIVE

In recent years, robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy has become widely used, and the perineal approach is utilized much less than before. However, radical perineal prostatectomy has some advantages with regard to operative complications. Here I evaluate 200 cases for which the perineal approach was used in the past 12 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2000 to 2012, radical perineal prostatectomies were performed for 200 patients and their operative complications were evaluated. The mean age of the patients was 68.5 years, with a PSA of 9.4 ng/ml, and Gleason score of 6.9. Their clinical stages were T1 in 168 cases (84.0%), T2 in 26 (13.0%) and T3 in 6 (3.0%).

RESULTS

Mean operative time was 85 minutes, and estimated blood loss was 220.0 ml. The median time for urethral catheter indwelling was 7 days, and the admission term was 14 days. Operations were performed safely in patients with a BMI of more than 30 kg/m2. Lymphadenectomies from the same incision were performed in 20 cases and there were no lymph node metastases. Rectal injuries occurred in 7 cases (3.5%) with 100 cases of Blet's approach so I changed to Young's approach. With Young's approach I have not experienced any rectal injuries. Wound infection occurred in 4 cases (2.0%), hematoma in 2 (1.0%), anastomotic stricture in 1 (0.5%), inguinal hernia in 1 (0.5%), and transient lower extremity neurapraxia in 1 (0.5%). Postperineal pain after operation was tolerated using a donut cushion, though some pain relievers were needed in 20 cases (10.0%). Fecal incontinence occurred in 4 cases (2.0%) but was temporary.

CONCLUSIONS

With radical perineal prostatectomy it is easy to perform vesicourethral anastomosis, apical dissection and nerve sparing, and there are few complications such as inguinal hernia, anastomotic stricture and so on. In addition, there is less blood loss with this approach because the dorsal vein complex and pudendal arteries are out of sight. Therefore, radical perineal prostatectomy is suggested to be useful because of its safety, short operation time and low cost. Finally this procedure can be selected as the first choice for patients with past history of lower abdominal operation and obesity.

Radical perineal prostatectomy: Our initial experience

OBJECTIVE

Radical prostatectomy is the standard treatment modality for localized prostate cancer. Minimally invasive surgery, especially robotic surgery, has attracted interest in the last 10 years, and open surgery has been less preferred. Among the open surgical procedures, the perineal approach is the least preferred by urologists, which may be related to their perception of its overall difficulty. In this study, we aimed to present our initial experience with learning and performing radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) and to draw attention to this method.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

After a short training period between November 2011 and May 2013, RPP was performed on 9 patients with localized prostate cancer. The patients were evaluated as for medical, and perioperative and major postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 60.4±5.3 (50-68) years, the mean preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value was 5.8±1.3 (4.0-7.6) ng/mL and the mean prostate volume was 38.8±7.7 (28-54) cc. The biopsy Gleason score ranged from 5 to 7. The median follow-up period was 14 (3-30) months. Anastomotic stricture did not occur in any of the patients. Of the 9 patients, 4 (44%) were immediately continent after catheter removal, while the remaining patients were continent at the end of three months. Of the 7 patients who underwent nerve-sparing surgery, 2 had postoperative spontaneous erections. Erectile function was maintained with phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE-5) inhibitor treatment in 3, and with intracavernosal injection in 1 patient. Penile prosthesis implantation was performed in 1 patient.

CONCLUSION

RPP has been a promising procedure at the start with its favorable oncologic and functional outcomes. This method should be considered by urologists, although it has been previously perceived as a challenging surgical procedure to perform.

Adjunctive maneuvers to treat urethral stricture: a review of the world literature

The development of urethral stricture (US) or bladder neck contracture is a relatively uncommon but well described condition observed primarily in men. Despite familiarity with US disease, management remains challenging for urologists. Risk factors for the development of USs or bladder neck contracture include primary treatment modality, tobacco smoking, coronary artery disease and poorly controlled diabetes mellitus. Numerous treatment options exist for this condition that vary in procedural complexity, including intermittent self catheterization (CIC), serial urethral dilation, endoscopic techniques and open reconstructive repairs. Repetitive procedures for this condition may carry increased failure rates and morbidities. For the treatment of refractory or recalcitrant bladder neck contracture, newer intralesional anti-proliferative, anti-scar agents have been used in combination with transurethral bladder neck incisions to augment outcome and long-term effect. The primary focus of this systematic review of the published literature is to streamline and summarize various and newer therapeutic modalities available to manage patients with US or bladder neck contracture.

The Quadrella: a novel approach to analyzing optimal outcomes after permanent seed prostate brachytherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To study a four-point combined analysis (Quadrella) of optimal outcome among patients treated with exclusive permanent seed prostate brachytherapy (PB), as defined by the likelihood of achieving disease control and preserving normal urinary, gastro-intestinal (GI) and sexual function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

384 patients with localized prostate cancer underwent PB at our institution with (125)I at a dose level of 144Gy. Subjects with erectile dysfunction who did not respond to medication were excluded. 281 patients with minimum 3-year follow-up were evaluated. Patients with concurrent biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), absent urinary and GI toxicities (grade 0 toxicities according to CTCAE v 3.0) and preserved sexual potency (with our without medication) were classified as the Quadrella group.

RESULTS

Among the 281 patients analyzed, the Quadrella was achieved in 49.1%, 48.0%, 50.4%, 41.7% and 65.2% in years 3-7, respectively. bPFS rates were 82.6-96.1%, corresponding potency rates were 63.6-82.3%, and normal urinary and GI function rates were 64.8-82.6% and 95-100%, respectively. By multivariate analysis, significant predictors of Quadrella were age (p=0.015), baseline IPSS (p=0.03) and time since PB (p=0.02).

CONCLUSION

Urinary and sexual toxicity remained the most common reasons for excluding patients from a perfect outcome (Quadrella), defined by strict criteria. This analysis can be useful for subsequent comparison between treatment modalities.

SIU/ICUD Consultation on Urethral Strictures: Posterior urethral stenosis after treatment of prostate cancer

Posterior urethral stenosis can result from radical prostatectomy in approximately 5%-10% of patients (range 1.4%-29%). Similarly, 4%-9% of men after brachytherapy and 1%-13% after external beam radiotherapy will develop stenosis. The rate will be greater after combination therapy and can exceed 40% after salvage radical prostatectomy. Although postradical prostatectomy stenoses mostly develop within 2 years, postradiotherapy stenoses take longer to appear. Many result in storage and voiding symptoms and can be associated with incontinence. The evaluation consists of a workup similar to that for lower urinary tract symptoms, with additional testing to rule out recurrent or persistent prostate cancer. Treatment is usually initiated with an endoscopic approach commonly involving dilation, visual urethrotomy with or without laser treatment, and, possibly, UroLume stent placement. Open surgical urethroplasty has been reported, as well as urinary diversion for recalcitrant stenosis. A proposed algorithm illustrating a graded approach has been provided.

Standardized approach for the treatment of refractory bladder neck contractures

Bladder neck contracture is a relatively uncommon but well-described complication after the surgical treatment of prostate cancer. Although numerous treatments have been described as an initial management strategy for patients with this condition, the management of refractory cases remains highly variable. This article evaluates various therapeutic maneuvers used for the treatment of refractory bladder neck contracture and further describes the preliminary results of an endoscopic balloon dilation with concomitant deep traunsurethral incision procedure. Short- and long-term management algorithms for patients with recurrent bladder neck contractures are reviewed.

Experience with radical perineal prostatectomy in the treatment of localized prostate cancer

Radical perineal prostatectomy is an alternative to the retropubic, robotic-assisted or the laparoscopic approach and it is one of the oldest surgical procedures for prostate cancer, but its use has declined over the past 30 years. The desire for lower morbidity, short hospital stay, and decreased costs has resulted in a renaissance of radical perineal prostatectomy. The combination of low morbidity, short hospital stay, and low economic costs brought to a renaissance of radical perineal prostatectomy.

The impact of bladder neck mucosal eversion during open radical prostatectomy on bladder neck stricture and urinary extravasation

PURPOSE

To determine whether the bladder neck mucosal eversion (BNM-eversion) during radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) reduces the risk of bladder neck stricture (BNS) and of peri-anastomotic extravasation (PAE) in postoperative cystography.

METHODS

Two hundred and eleven patients with clinically localized prostate cancer underwent RRP and were prospectively randomized into patients with BNM-eversion (group I) and without BNM-eversion (group II). All patients underwent an evaluation of PAE by retrograde cystography on postoperative day 8. We assessed BNS after 6 months.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients with and 113 patients without BNM-eversion were included. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics, including age, TNM-classification, Gleason score, PSA, prostate volume, and blood loss in both groups. A complete follow-up of 6 months for BNS was available for 188 patients (89.1 %). Sixteen BNS out of 188 patients were recorded, 4.7 % (n = 4) in group I and 11.7 % (n = 12) in group II (p = 0.09). Data from 205 out of 211 patients were available for the evaluation of the extravasation by cystography. Peri-anastomotic extravasation was detectable in 11.96 %, (11/205) in group I and in 21.24 % (24/205) in group II (p = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

BNM-eversion does not have a positive influence on the prevention of bladder neck strictures. Peri-anastomotic extravasation detected by cystography does not correlate with a formation of bladder neck stricture.

Contemporary radical prostatectomy

Purpose. Patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer have more surgical treatment options than in the past. This paper focuses on the procedures' oncological or functional outcomes and perioperative morbidities of radical retropubic prostatectomy, radical perineal prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods. A MEDLINE/PubMed search of the literature on radical prostatectomy and other new management options was performed. Results. Compared to the open procedures, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy has no confirmed significant difference in most literatures besides less blood loss and blood transfusion. Nerve sparing is a safe means of preserving potency on well-selected patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Positive surgical margin rates of radical prostatectomy affect the recurrence and survival of prostate cancer. The urinary and sexual function outcomes have been vastly improved. Neoadjuvant treatment only affects the rate of positive surgical margin. Adjuvant therapy can delay and reduce the risk of recurrence and improve the survival of the high risk prostate cancer. Conclusions. For the majority of patients with organ-confined prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy remains a most effective approach. Radical perineal prostatectomy remains a viable approach for patients with morbid obesity, prior pelvic surgery, or prior pelvic radiation. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has become popular among surgeons but has not yet become the firmly established standard of care. Long-term data have confirmed the efficacy of radical retropubic prostatectomy with disease control rates and cancer-specific survival rates.