Reconstruction of urethro-vesic anastomosis in the performance of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and its effect on restoring the function of urine retention
https://doi.org/10.25694/URMJ.2018.09.31
Abstract
The widespread introduction of radical prostatectomy as the main method of surgical treatment of patients with prostate cancer provided satisfactory oncological results. Nowadays, research work is focused on improving the functional. The problem of restoring the function of retention of urine in the early period after the operation is becoming more relevant. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy demonstrates proven advantages in maintaining the natural anatomy of the pelvis and sphincter apparatus. A discursive subject is the use of various techniques for reconstructing the urethro-vesical anastomosis zone. Variants of reconstruction of anterior, posterior semicircle of urethro-vesic anastomosis and total are described. In a number of cases, the techniques complement each other. It is necessary to accumulate knowledge and experience in order to optimize and standardize the technique of surgery to improve the functional results and quality of life of patients.
About the Authors
E. N. Golubtsova
Российская медицинская академия непрерывного последипломного образования; ГКБ им.С.П.Боткина
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
A. A. Tomilov
ГКБ им.С.П.Боткина
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
E. I. Veliev
Российская медицинская академия непрерывного последипломного образования; ГКБ им.С.П.Боткина
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, RoccoB. etal.Early complication rates in a single surgeon series of 2500 robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies: report applying a standardized grading system. Eur Urol. 2010; 57: 945-952.
2. Cho JW, Kim TH, Sung GT. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single surgeon's experience. Korean J Urol 2009;50:1198-1202.
3. Magheli A., Jonas Busch J., Leva N. et al. Comparison of surgical technique (Open vs. Laparoscopic) on pathological and long term functional outcomes following radical prostatectomy. BMC Urology 2014, 14:18-24.
4. Ficarra V., Novara G., Rosen RC. et a.l. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Reporting Urinary Continence Recovery After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy. European Urology 62 (2012) 405-417.
5. Noguchi M., Kakuma Т., Suekane S. еt al. A randomized clinical trial of suspension technique for improving early recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int 2008 ; 102 : 958 - 963.
6. Patel VR., Coelho RF., Palmer KJ. et al. Periurethral suspension stitch during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the technique and continence outcomes. Eur Urol 2009 ; 56 : 472 - 478.
7. Cestari A., Ferrari M., Ghezzi M et al: Retropubic intracorporeal placement of a suburethral autologous sling during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to improve early urinary continence recovery: preliminary data. J Endourol 2015; 29: 1379 - 1385.
8. Nguyen HG., Punnen S., Cowan JE. et al. A Randomized Study of Intraoperative Autologous Retropubic Urethral Sling on Urinary Control after Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy. J Urol. 2017 Feb;197(2):369-375
9. Bahler CD., Sundaram CP., Kella N. et al. A parallel randomized clinical trial examining the return of urinary continence after robotassisted radical prostatectomy with or without a small intestinal submucosa bladder neck sling. J Urol 2016; 196: 179 - 184.
10. Effect of Bladder Neck Preservation and Posterior Urethral Reconstruction during Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Urinary Continence Youn C.Y., Tae H.K., Gyung T.S. Korean Journal of Urology 2012;53:29-33
11. Gu X, Araki M, Wong C. Continence outcomes after bladder neck preservation during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP).Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2015;24(6):364-371.
12. Walz J., Burnett A.L., Costello A.J. et al. A critical analysis of the current knowledge of surgical anatomy related to optimization of cancer control and preservation of continence and erection in candidates for radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2010; 57 : 179192.
13. Costello A.J., Dowdle B.W., Namdarian B., et al. Immunohistochemical study of the cavernous nerves in the periprostatic region. Bju International 2010; 107, 1210-1215.
14. Tewari A.K., Ali A., Ghareeb G. et al. Improving time to continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy:augmentation of the total anatomic reconstruction technique by adding dynamic detrusor cuff trigonoplasty and suprapubic tube placement. J Endourol 2012;26: 1546-1552.
15. Lim S.K., Kim K.H., Shin T.Y. et al. Current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy:how does it compare with other surgical approaches? Int J Urol2013;20:271-284.
16. Galfano A., Trapani D., Sozzi F. et al. Beyond the learning curve of the retzius-sparing approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional results of the first 200 patients with >1 year of follow-up.Eur Urol 2013;64:974-980.
17. Lim S.K., Kim K.H., Shin T.Y. et al. Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: combining the best of retropubic and perineal approaches BJU Int. 2014 Aug;114(2):236-244.
18. Rocco B., Cozzi G., Spinelli MG. et al: Posterior musculofascial reconstruction after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 779 - 790.
19. Ghani KR., Menon M: Posterior reconstruction: weighing the evidence. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 791 - 793.
20. Ficarra V., Gan M., Borghesi M. et al. Posterior muscolofascial reconstruction into urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2012 Dec;26(12):1542-1545.
21. Jeong W., Lee J.K., Oh J.J. et al. Effects of New 1-Step Posterior Reconstruction Method on Recovery of Continence after Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy: Results of a Prospective, Single-Blind, Parallel Group, Randomized, Controlled Trial Chang J Urol. 2015Mar;193(3):935-942
22. Student V.Jr., Vidlar A., Grepl M. et al. Advanced Reconstruction of Vesicourethral Support (ARVUS) during Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: One-year Functional Outcomes in a Two-group Randomised Controlled Trial Eur Urol. 2017 May;71(5):822-830.
23. Gratzke C., Dovey Z., Novara G. et al. Early Catheter Removal after Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Surgical Technique and Outcomes for the Aalst Technique (ECaRemA Study). Eur Urol. 2016 May;69(5):917-923.
24. Porpiglia F., Bertolo R., Manfredi M. et. al. Total Anatomical Reconstruction During Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Implications on Early Recovery of Urinary Continence. Eur Urol 2016 Mar: 69(3): 485-495.
Review
For citations:
Golubtsova EN, Tomilov AA, Veliev EI. Reconstruction of urethro-vesic anastomosis in the performance of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and its effect on restoring the function of urine retention. Ural Medical Journal. 2018;(9):120-125. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25694/URMJ.2018.09.31
Views:
123
Email this article 