Devastated Bladder Outlet in Pelvic Cancer Survivors: Issues on Surgical Reconstruction and Quality of Life

Bladder outlet obstruction following treatment of pelvic cancer, predominantly prostate cancer, occurs in 1-8% of patients. The high incidence of prostate cancer combined with the long-life expectancy after treatment has increased concerns with cancer survivorship care. However, despite increased oncological cure rates, these adverse events do occur, compromising patients' quality of life. Non-traumatic obstruction of the posterior urethra and bladder neck include membranous and prostatic urethral stenosis and bladder neck stenosis (also known as contracture). The devastated bladder outlet can result from benign conditions, such as neurogenic dysfunction, trauma, iatrogenic causes, or more frequently from complications of oncologic treatment, such as prostate, bladder and rectum. Most posterior urethral stenoses may respond to endoluminal treatments such as dilatation, direct vision internal urethrotomy, and occasionally urethral stents. Although surgical reconstruction offers the best chance of durable success, these reconstructive options are fraught with severe complications and, therefore, are far from being ideal. In patients with prior RT, failed reconstruction, densely fibrotic and/or necrotic and calcified posterior urethra, refractory incontinence or severe comorbidities, reconstruction may not be either feasible or recommended. In these cases, urinary diversion with or without cystectomy is usually required. This review aims to discuss the diagnostic evaluation and treatment options for patients with bladder outlet obstruction with a special emphasis on patients unsuitable for reconstruction of the posterior urethra and requiring urinary diversion.

Deep lateral transurethral incision for vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the outcomes of deep lateral incision for vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy and its impact on postoperative urinary incontinence.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 43 men who underwent deep lateral incision for non-obliterated vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy between 2011 and 2020. The bladder neck was deeply incised through its circular fibers into the surrounding perivesical fat at 3 and 9 o'clock through electrocautery incision using needle-type electrodes. Successful deep lateral incision was defined as the absence of additional treatment, including self-dilatation. The postoperative urinary incontinence status was evaluated based on the number of pads used daily.

RESULTS

Deep lateral incision was successful in 35 (81.4%) patients, with a median follow-up period of 43 months (interquartile range 15-80 months). There was no significant association of age (P = 0.66), body mass index (P = 0.49) and history of diabetes mellitus (P = 0.39), radiation therapy (P = 0.89) or previous vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis treatment (P = 0.71) with the incision outcomes; however, there were significantly more unsuccessful cases in those with preoperative urinary retention (P = 0.04) or indwelling urinary catheters for >5 days post-incision (P = 0.01). A second incision was carried out in eight patients and a third incision in two patients, resulting in 42 (97.7%) successful incisions. A total of 37 (88.1%) patients had urinary incontinence and used at least one pad daily; seven (16.7%) underwent artificial urinary sphincter implantation after the last incision.

CONCLUSIONS

Deep lateral incision is highly effective for treating vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy. Appropriate treatment is required for urinary incontinence, which occurs frequently after incision.

Clinical Outcomes of a Combined Robotic, Transabdominal, and Open Transperineal Approach for Anastomotic Posterior Urethroplasty

Background: Robotic pelvic surgery is being increasingly utilized for reconstruction proximal to the genitourinary diaphragm. We describe a combined robotic, transabdominal, and open transperineal approach for complex anastomotic posterior urethroplasty. Materials and Methods: We performed a multi-institutional retrospective study of patients who underwent anastomotic posterior urethroplasty by a combined robotic, transabdominal, and open transperineal approach between January 2012 and December 2018. Patient demographics; preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative clinical data; and complications were reviewed. Urethroplasty success, de novo stress urinary incontinence (SUI), and de novo erectile dysfunction (ED) were evaluated. Results: Twelve patients were identified with a mean follow-up of 596 (range 73-1618) days. Mean patient age was 65.9 (range 53.4-76.8). Reconstruction required corporal splitting, prostatectomy, and gracilis muscle flap use in one (8.3%), eight (66.7%), and four (33.3%) patients, respectively. Postoperative urinary leak, thromboembolic event, and wound abscess occurred in one (8.3%), one (8.3%), and two (16.7%) patients, respectively. Stenosis recurrence occurred in two patients (16.7%) at a mean 187.5 (20-355) postoperative days. De novo ED and de novo SUI were reported in two (16.7%) and four (33.3%) patients, respectively. Nine patients (75.0%) underwent placement of an artificial urinary sphincter at a mean interval of 359.2 (111-1456) days after the index procedure, with no subsequent erosion. Conclusions: Complex posterior urethroplasty by a combined robotic, transabdominal and open transperineal approach is associated with success and complications rates that are comparable to open techniques and may allow for adjunctive procedures such as prostatectomy. This technique allows for the reconstruction of posterior urethral stenoses that would otherwise have been managed conservatively or with urinary diversion.

Robotic urethral reconstruction: redefining the paradigm of posterior urethroplasty

Outlet procedures for benign prostatic hypertrophy, prostate cancer therapy, and trauma can result in stenosis of the posterior urethra, a complex reconstructive problem that often fails conservative endoscopic management, necessitating more aggressive and definitive reconstructive solutions. This is typically done with an open technique which may require a combined abdominoperineal approach, pubectomy, and/or flap interposition. Implementation of a robot-assisted platform affords several potential advantages including smaller incisions, magnified field of vision, near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging to characterize tissue integrity, enhanced dexterity within the deep and narrow confines of the male pelvis, sparing of the perineal planes, and shorter convalescence. Herein, we describe important surgical considerations for robotic posterior urethral reconstruction.