Results of a Continent of Urine After an Open Retropubic Prostatectomy with Preservation of the Puboprostatic Ligament
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
Open retropubic prostatectomy is one of the most common operations used to treat clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa). Today, there is a limited amount of evidence of the successful use of some modern surgical modifications.
The objective: to analyze the functional results of applying the technique of preservation of the prostoprostatic ligament in a group of patients with localized prostate cancer.
Materials and methods. A clinical retrospective study was carried out over a 3-year period at the Urology Clinic of theScientificCenter for the Management of Human Migration. The study included men with clinically localized prostate cancer who agreed to undergo surgical treatment. Patients with locally advanced forms of prostate cancer and those with severe concomitant pathology were excluded from the study. Data analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 17).
Results. In total, from September 2014 to September 2017, 72 patients underwent open-ended radial prostatectomy with preservation of the puboprostatic ligament. The average age of the patients was 67 years (ranged from 55 to 76 years). In 6 patients, stress incontinence was detected, in 8 patients, post-prostatectomy incontinence was detected for 3 months. So, 58 (out of 72) patients out of 72 for 3 months were continental.
Conclusion. Preservation of puboprostatic ligaments when performing an open-ended posterior prostatectomy is associated with faster and more frequent renewal of the urine continent in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer.##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the first publication of original scientific articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which allows others to distribute work with acknowledgment of authorship and first publication in this journal.
References
Возіанов С.О., Шамраєв С.М., Соснін М.Д., Леоненко А.М. & Грицаюк А.А. (2018). Отдаленные онкологические результаты радикальной простатэктомии у больных локализованным раком предстательной железы // Здоровье мужчины, (1), 132-135.
Григоренко В.М. Особливості демографічних показників населення України в аспекті поширення раку передміхурової залози / В.М. Григоренко, Н.О. Сайдакова, Р.О. Данилець, Н.В. Бровко // Науковий журнал МОЗ України. – 2014. – № 1. – С. 85–92. – Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/njmoz_2014_1_14
Дідик І.В. Рак передміхурової залози як світова проблема. Поширеність, фактори ризику, своєчасність діагностики (огляд літератури) // Укр. мед. часопис, 2016, 3: 113.
Сайдакова Н.О. та співавтори. Рак передміхурової залози: медико-демографічні особливості по адміністративних територіях України // Здоровье мужчины, 2014, 1: 21-23.
Wei T., Dunn R.L., Marcovich R., Montie J.E. and Sanda G. Prospective assessment of patient reported urinary continence after radical prostatectomy // The Journal of Urology. – 2000. – Vol. 64, № 3. – Р. 744–750.
Cambo A.J. and Evans C.P. Minimising postoperative incontinence following radical prostatectomy: considerations and evidence // Eur Urol. – Vol. 50, № 50. – Р. 901–913.
F. Atug, F.R. Kural, I. Tufek, S. Strivastav and H. Akpinar. Anterior and posterior reconstruction technique and its impact on early return of continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy // J Endourol. – 2012. Vol. 26, № 4. – Р. 381–386.
K.R. Loughlin and M.M. Prasad. Postprostatectomy urinary incontinence: a confluence of 3 factors // J Urol. – 2010. – Vol. 183, № 3. – Р. 871–877.
J.L. Stanford, Z. Feng, A.S. Hamilton et al. Urinary et sexual function after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: the prostate cancer outcomes study // J Am Med Ass. – 2000. – Vol. 283, № 3. – Р. 354–360.
M.G. Sanda, R.I. Dunn, J. Michalski et al. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors // New Eng J Med. – 2008. – Vol. 358, № 12. – Р. 1250–1261.
M.I. Resnick and M. Thompson, Advanced Therapy of prostate disease. vol.1, PMPH-USA, Shelton, Conn, USA, 2000.
A.K. Tewary, K. Bigelow, S. Rao et al. Anatomic restoration technique of continence mechanism and preservation of puboprostatic collar: a novel modification to achieve early urinary continence in men undergoing robotic prostatectomy // Urol. – 2007. – Vol. 69, № 4. – Р. 726–731.
T.M. Kessler, F.C. Burkard, and U.E. Studer. Nerve sparing open radical retropubic prostatectomy // Eur Urol. – 2007. – Vol. 51, № 1. – Р. 90–97.
E. Sacco, T. Prayer-Galetty, F. Pinto et al. Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: incidence by definition, risk factors and temporal trend in a large series with a long-term follow-up // Br J Urol Int. – 2006. – Vol. 97, № 6. – Р. 1234–1241.
Majoros, Attila et al. «Urinary incontinence and voiding dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy (prospective urodynamic study)». Neurourology and Urodynamics: Official Journal of the International Continence Society 25.1 (2006): 2-7.
R.E. Coelho, B. Rocco, M.B. Patel et al. Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotassisted radical prostatectomy: a critical review of outcomes reported by high-volume centers // J Endourol. – 2010. – Vol. 24, № 12. – Р. 2003–2015.
J.A. Eastham, P.T. Scardino and M.W. Kattan. Predicting an optimal outcome after radical prostatectomy: the trifecta nomogram // J Urol. – 2008. – Vol. 179, № 6. – Р. 2207–2211.
R.P. Myers. Male urethral sphincteric anatomy and radical prostatectomy // Urologic Clinics of North America. – 1991. – Vol. 18, № 2. – Р. 211–227.
M.S. Steiner, R.A. Morton and P.C. Walsh. Impact of anatomical radical prostatectomy on urinary continence // J Urol. – Vol. 145, № 3. – Р. 512–515.
H.R. Wabinga, D.M. Parkin, F. Wabwire-Mangen, S. Nambooze. Trends in cancer incidence in Kyadondo Country, Uganda, 1960-1997, Br J Cancer. – 2000. – Vol. 82, № 9. – Р. 1585–1592.
F. Abdollah, M. Sun, F. Montorsi, P.I. Karakiewicz. A competing-risk analysis of survival after alternative treatment modalities for prostate cancer patients: 1988–2006 // Eur Urol. – 2011. – Vol. 59, № 1. – Р. 88–95.
A. Heidenreich, J. Bellmunt, M. Billa et al. EUA guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localized disease // Eur Urol. – 2011. – Vol. 59, № 1. – Р. 61–71.
S.E. Lerner, M.L. Blute, M.M. Lieber, H. Zincke. Morbidity of contemporary radical retropubic prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer // Oncology. – 1995. – Vol. 9, № 5. – Р. 379–385.
J.A. Eastham, M.W. Kattan, E. Rogers et al. Risk factors for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy // J Urol. – 1996. – Vol. 156, № 5. – Р. 1707–1713.
M. Galukande, E. Elobu, S. Luboga. Challenges facing surgical training in the Great Lakes region in sub-Saharan Africa: a review article // East and Central African J Surg. – 2013. – Vol. 18, № 3. – Р. 3–11.
M. Galukande, J. Jombwe. Feasibility of laparoscopic surgery in a resource limited setting: cost comment, skills transfer and outcomes // East and Central African J Surg. – 2011. – Vol. 16, № 2/ – Р. 111–116.
F. Abdollah, M. Sun, N. Suardi et al. Prediction of functional outcomes after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: results of conditional survival analyses // Eur Urol. – 2012. – Vol. 62, № 1. – Р. 42–52.
