保留尿道括约肌功能对腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术后尿控的影响

目的:探讨保留尿道括约肌功能对腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术后尿控的影响。方法:选取2013年5月至2015年8月收治的行腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术的80例前列腺癌患者作为研究对象,依据是否保留尿道括约肌功能分为对照组(未保留)及研究组(保留),每组40例,对比两组患者术后3个月的尿控情况。结果:两组患者尿控分级差异有统计学意义(P0.05);术后两组患者前列腺体积、前列腺特异性抗原、ICI-Q-SF评分、总并发症发生率差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:保留尿道括约肌功能可显著提高腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术后的尿控效果,改善前列腺体积、前列腺特异性抗原、ICI-Q-SF评分等指标,降低术后并发症发生率,有助于尿控目标的实现,提高了患者的生活质量,具有重要的应用价值。     

前列腺癌患者根治术后尿失禁的预防

目的探讨保护尿道膜部括约肌和神经血管束及重建膀胱颈部对前列腺癌根治术后尿失禁的预防作用。方法对32例前列腺癌采用保护尿道膜部括约肌和前列腺旁神经血管束,并在重建膀胱颈部黏膜充分外翻后的后壁行折叠缝合1针的方法,进行前列腺癌根治术,观察术后尿失禁发生情况。结果经6～72个月随访,全部患者排尿通畅,无肿瘤复发,除2例发生轻度尿失禁外,其余30例在6个月内均恢复尿控能力。结论保护尿道膜部括约肌和前列腺旁神经血管束,在充分外翻膀胱黏膜的重建膀胱颈后壁折叠缝合,能减少前列腺癌根治术后尿失禁的发生。     

保留尿控功能在耻骨后前列腺癌根治术的应用

目的:探讨保护耻骨前列腺韧带和保护尿道膜部括约肌群在耻骨后前列腺癌根治术后减少尿失禁的作用.方法:Ⅰ组32例前列腺癌按常规操作行耻骨后前列腺癌根治术,Ⅱ组32例前列腺癌采用保留耻骨前列腺韧带和尿道膜部括约肌群的方法行耻骨后前列腺癌根治术,术后1、3、6、12个月分别随访尿失禁情况.结果:两组年龄和PSA无显著差异,两组前列腺尖端切缘均无肿瘤残留,前列腺侧缘阳性率类似.Ⅱ组术后1、3、6个月尿控效果明显优于I组(P<0.05),但1年随访,Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组尿控效果类似.结论:在耻骨后前列腺癌根治术中保留耻骨前列腺韧带作用和尿道膜部括约肌群有显著提高近期尿控的效果,但1年随访两组尿控率无明显差异.     

机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术中血管神经束保留技术的疗效分析

目的探讨机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺根治术中血管神经束保留的可行性。方法回顾分析我科于2014年3至7月对42例TNM分期为T1b~T2的前列腺癌患者采用筋膜内剥离血管神经束技术行经腹途径机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术。技术要点:经筋膜内沿前列腺包膜锐性分离至前列腺尖部,保留尿道括约肌和尿道直肠肌;正确判断前列腺与膀胱颈交界部,保护膀胱颈环状肌环;横行离断膀胱颈后唇,在狄氏筋膜和膀胱肌外层之间向膀胱颈近端方向适当游离膀胱颈后唇;吻合后尿道与膀胱颈,将吻合口的前壁与耻骨后血管复合体固定。术后随访尿控及性功能恢复情况。结果 42例均手术成功,术中平均失血量80(50~210)ml。术后病理切缘均阴性。拔出尿管时间平均10d,术后尿漏2例。随访时间平均11(8~12)个月。术后3个月复查tPSA,均0.2 ng/mL。术后3、6个月控尿有效率分别为90%(38/42)和93%(39/42)。术后3、6个月,勃起功能评分:术前21分的31例分别为81%(25/31)、87%(27/31)。结论机器人辅助前列腺癌根治术经筋膜内保留血管神经束,在技术上是可行的;对前列腺周围解剖组织结构的完全性保留可加快患者术后尿控及性功能恢复,提高患者生活质量。     

保留神经血管束的耻骨后前列腺癌根治术的疗效观察

目的：小结开展保留神经血管束的耻骨后前列腺癌根治术（RRP）的经验和教训。方法：对40例穿刺活检证实的前列腺癌患者行RRP,术前采用新辅助治疗,术中采用保护尿道膜部括约肌和前列腺侧旁神经血管束,并在重建膀胱颈部粘膜充分外翻后的后壁行折叠缝合1针。间断、无张力行残留尿道和外翻的膀胱颈缝合。结果：经3～78个月随访,全部患者排尿通畅,无肿瘤复发;除2例发生轻度尿失禁外,余38例在6个月内均恢复尿控能力。结论：充分做好耻骨后前列腺癌根治术前的准备工作,有利于手术操作;术中保护好尿道膜部括约肌和前列腺侧旁神经血管束,在充分外翻膀胱粘膜的重建膀胱颈后壁折叠缝合,能减少前列腺癌根治术后尿失禁的发生。     

保留部分近端前列腺部尿道的腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术及其临床观察

目的探讨保留部分近端前列腺部尿道的腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术的手术方法,分析该术式的安全性、可行性及其对早期尿控恢复的作用。方法对31例保留部分近端前列腺部尿道的腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术(A组)和26例非保留部分近端前列腺部尿道的腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术(B组)的患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析:观察比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、切缘阳性率、尿控、围术期并发症。结果两组手术时间、术中出血量、切缘阳性率、围术期并发症无显著性差异。拔除导尿管后2周、1个月、3个月时两组尿控有显著性差异(P0.05)。结论保留近端前列腺部尿道的腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术是一种安全、可行的手术方法,对术后早期尿控的恢复起到了积极的促进作用。     

保留控尿功能的腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术

目的 探讨保护控尿功能的前列腺癌根治术的技术要点.方法 对收治的94例T1b～T2c前列腺癌患者行保留控尿功能的前列腺癌根治术,即腹腔镜下精细解剖前列腺尖部,保护EUS及其控尿神经,膀胱颈后唇成形后与尿道吻合;并同前期42例行常规前列腺癌根治术(LRP)的患者比较,术后30、60和90 d评估患者的控尿状况.控尿标准: 站立或行走时无尿液漏出,或全天使用尿垫不超过1块.结果 术后30、60 d控尿率LRP组为27.7%(13/47)、66.0%(31/47);CSLRP组为55.3%(26/47)、85.1%(40/47),均有统计学差异(χ2＝7.406,4.663,P<0.05).术后90 d两组控尿率为78.7%(37/47)和91.5%(43/47)(χ2＝3.02,P>0.05).结论 利用腹腔镜的优点,保护EUS和膀胱颈后唇成形加强尿道后壁,能明显加快前列腺癌根治术后控尿的恢复时间.     

提高前列腺癌根治术后尿控能力的临床研究

目的：探讨提高前列腺癌根治术后尿控能力的方法。方法：对15例前列腺癌采用保留尿道膜部括约肌及前列腺侧旁神经血管束的方法进行前列腺癌根治术。结果：经6—45个月随访，15例患者排尿通畅，无肿瘤复发，除1例有轻度尿失禁外，余14例6个月内均恢复尿控能力。结论：保留尿道膜部括约肌及前列腺侧旁神经血管束的方法能减低前列腺癌根治术后尿失禁。     

术中电生理确认前列腺癌术后控尿能力

为了解前列腺癌术中神经保留对术后控尿的确切作用，作者在术中采用电生理测试以确认血管神经束的功能保留。85例行前列腺根治手术的局限性前列腺癌患者人选，根治手术中先用大体解剖方式进行血管神经束保留，电刺激血管神经束后监测海绵体内或尿道内的压力变化以确认保留是否确切。通过以上方式分别将患者以神经保留程度分为3组：①双侧神经保留组；②单侧神经保留组；③未保留组。患者在术前、术后3个月和术后6个月采用自我问卷方式进行控尿情况的评价。     

前列腺癌根治术中保护控尿功能的体会

目的：减少耻骨后前列腺癌根治术患者术后尿失禁发生率。方法：对16例B超前列腺癌患者行保护控尿功能的解剖性耻骨后前列腺癌根治术。结果：16例术后随访3个月-5年，平均13个月。膀胱控尿正常者13例，轻度压力性尿失禁者2例，严重尿失禁者1例。结论：在行耻骨后前列腺癌根治术时，认识尿道括约肌及其支配神经的解剖位置及结构，避免对其损伤可以减少术后尿失禁发生率。     

Laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy: Urodynamic evaluation of vesicourethral function

Objectives:   To assess the impact of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy on vesicourethral function and compare it to that of open radical prostatectomy.
Methods:   Sixty-three patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer were included in this retrospective analysis. Urodynamic parameters, including maximum urethral closing pressure (MUCP), functional profile length (FPL), bladder compliance, maximum cystometric capacity (MCC) and detrusor overactivity, were considered. Continence status and changes in urodynamic findings before and after surgery were evaluated. In addition, postoperative urodynamic findings were compared with those in 58 patients undergoing open radical prostatectomy.
Results:   After laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, MUCP and FPL showed a significant postoperative decrease. Continence rates after surgery were 82% in the laparoscopic and 78% in the open group. Comparison of postoperative data between continent and incontinent patients in both surgical groups showed significantly lower MUCP, shorter FPL, lower bladder compliance and higher incidence of detrusor overactivity in incontinent patients. Although there was no significant difference in postoperative MUCP and FPL between the two groups, bladder compliance was significantly lower and incidence of detrusor overactivity was significantly higher in the open prostatectomy group.
Conclusions:   Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has a negative impact on storage function by impairing function of the urethral sphincter and decreasing bladder compliance. There is no difference in postoperative urethral function between open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Laparoscopic surgery might be associated with less impairment of bladder function than open surgery.     

Intraoperative nerve stimulation with measurement of urethral sphincter pressure changes during radical retropubic prostatectomy: a feasibility study

PURPOSE: We evaluated the feasibility of using intraoperative nerve stimulation and real-time urodynamic monitoring to identify the intrapelvic innervation of the urethral sphincter during radical retropubic prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using an intraurethral balloon pressure transducer and nerve stimulator changes in urethral pressure were measured in response to stimulation of the neurovascular bundles, pelvic side wall, bladder neck, rectus muscle and other structures in 8 patients undergoing nerve sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Intraurethral pressure changes were charted on an urodynamic monitor and correlated with the anatomical location of stimulation. RESULTS: Stimulation of the neurovascular bundles resulted in measurable and significant (greater than 10 cm. H(2)O) increases in intraurethral pressure in all 8 patients. The mean pressure increase was 22 cm. H(2)O. Neither control structure, that is the bladder neck or rectus, resulted in pressure changes with stimulation. In 60% of the subjects pelvic side wall stimulation resulted in urethral pressure increases, while in 40% this stimulation caused pelvic contraction floor but no pressure increase. The mean pressure changes with side wall stimulation was 14 cm. H(2)O. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative stimulation of pelvic neural structures and measurement of changes in urethral pressure in response to stimulation are feasible during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Stimulating the neurovascular bundle consistently results in significant increases in urethral pressure. The finding of an intrapelvic urethral innervation supports the previously published observation that nerve sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy may result in improved continence postoperatively.     

Assessment of the intrinsic urethral sphincter component function in postprostatectomy urinary incontinence

Postprostatectomy incontinence remains a disabling condition. Sphincter injury, detrusor instability, and decreased bladder compliance have been previously reported as major factors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the urethral sphincter intrinsic component, which may provide passive continence. A urodynamic evaluation was performed in 20 patients undergoing a radical retropubic prostatectomy in the preoperative period and 3 months after surgery. Patients with disabled urinary incontinence underwent a new urodynamic evaluation 6 months later. The urethral pressure profile was measured just before, then 10, 20, and 30 minutes after the injection of 0.5 mg/kg moxisylyte chlorhydrate, an alpha adrenergic blocker. Three different pressure components were defined in urethral sphincter capacity: baseline, adrenergic, and voluntary. A postoperative intrinsic urethral sphincter pressure component was found in 17 patients and its value was under 6 cm H(2)O in five cases of severe incontinence. No significant difference was observed for these patients on urethral profile components 6 months later. In contrast, in cases of significant intrinsic component value, no incontinence was observed in most patients. Passive continence after radical prostatectomy should be a matter of concern and may also explain paradoxical incontinence, despite high voluntary urethral pressure obtained after reeducation. A follow-up evaluation of the intrinsic sphincter component is suggested, by using an alpha receptor blockage test during urodynamic studies in the management of patients with postprostatectomy incontinence.     

Vas deferens urethral support improves early post-prostatectomy urine continence

Urine continence is often impaired after radical prostatectomy. Few randomized studies prove the efficacy of novel surgical approaches. Vas deferens urethral support (VDUS) during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) was studied for improvement of early postoperative urine continence in a single-centre prospective double-blind randomized study with a power of 90% to detect a 30% decrease in early incontinence. 112 men were randomized, and 108 could be analyzed (VDUS n?=?54, noVDUS n?=?54). VDUS improved early continence by 40% at 1?month (59% vs. 35%, P?=?0.02); 6 months postoperatively this was 72% vs. 62%, P?=?0.41. A 24-h pad test at 1?day, 3?days, and 1?week showed decreased amounts of urine loss in the VDUS group. The ICIQ-SF score was significantly lower for the VDUS group within the first month after surgery. VDUS had no impact upon quality of life questionnaire analyses for overall and lower urinary tract symptom-related quality of life but showed a significant improvement in the social domain of the EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire. VDUS moderately improved early urine continence within 1?month after RALP.     

Urinary incontinence and voiding dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy (prospective urodynamic study)

AIMS: During this prospective study we analyzed the effects of radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) on bladder and sphincter function by comparing preoperative and postoperative urodynamic data. The aim of the study was to determine the reason for urinary incontinence after RRP and explain why one group of patients will be immediately continent after catheter removal, while others need some time to reach complete continence. METHODS: Urodynamic examination was performed in 63 patients 3-7 days before and 2 months after surgery. RESULTS: Forty-three (68.2%) and 53 (84.1%) patients regained continence at 2 and 9 months following RRP, respectively. Ten patients (15.9%) were immediately continent after catheter removal. Urodynamic stress incontinence was detected in 18 (28.6%), and detrusor overactivity incontinence in 2 (3.2%) patients 2 months after surgery. The amplitude of preoperative maximal voluntary sphincteric contractions was significantly higher in the postoperative continent group (125 vs. 96.5 cmH(2)O, P < 0.0001). The patients who were immediately continent following catheter removal had no lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and urodynamic abnormality preoperatively, and they had significantly higher preoperative and postoperative maximum urethral closure pressure (at rest and during voluntary sphincter contraction) than those who became continent later on. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the main cause of incontinence after RRP is sphincteric weakness. In the continent group, those who became immediately continent had significantly higher maximum urethral closure pressure values at rest and at voluntary sphincteric contraction even before the surgery.     

Sphincter electromyography in patients after radical prostatectomy and cystoprostatectomy.

Urethral sphincter weakness may occur after major pelvic surgery and urinary incontinence, either temporary or permanent, may result. In order to determine whether the cavernous nerves described by Donker and Walsh carry fibres to the distal urethral sphincter as well as those supplying the corporal bodies, we have studied prospectively the sphincter electromyography in 2 groups of 10 patients: (1) those who had undergone nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy for prostatic carcinoma and (2) those who has undergone radical cystoprostatectomy for bladder carcinoma. This study group was compared with a control group of normal individuals. The results showed significant differences in duration of motor units between the control group and prostatectomy group and between the control group and cystectomy group but no significant difference between the 2 operated groups. There was no significant difference in amplitude of the motor units, the sacral reflex latencies or the pudendal somatosensory evoked potentials between all 3 groups. It was therefore concluded that division of the cavernous nerve of Walsh does not compromise distal urethral sphincter function. Furthermore, radical transabdominal lower urinary tract surgery may induce significant electromyographic changes in the external sphincter which may not be clinically evident. This may potentially affect continence later if second-stage urinary reconstructive surgery is undertaken.     

Urodynamic Evaluation of Changes in Urinary Control After Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy

Purpose

Urodynamic evaluations were done in patients before and after radical prostatectomy to obtain more information about the factors that affect continence.

Materials and Methods

Urodynamic testing was done in 82 patients before, and 6 to 8 weeks and 6 months (9 cases) after radical prostatectomy. Evaluation included measurement of cystometric bladder capacity, compliance, functional profile length, maximal urethral closure pressure, maximal urethral closure pressure during voluntary contraction of the external sphincter, residual urine, maximal flow rate and bladder instability.

Results

The continence rate was 33.4, 69.4, 84.7 and 90.9% at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after radical prostatectomy, respectively. Mean functional urethral length decreased from 61 mm. preoperatively to 25.9 mm. postoperatively, maximal urethral pressure from 89.6 to 65.2 cm. water and bladder capacity from 338.7 to 278.8 ml. Bladder instability was found in 17 and 41% of cases before and directly after radical prostatectomy, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference in maximal urethral closure pressure (68.1 versus 53.1 cm. water) as well as functional urethral length (27.6 versus 20.5 mm.) in continent versus incontinent patients, respectively. Urodynamic examination 6 months after prostatectomy showed an increase in functional profile length and maximal urethral pressure, while bladder measurements did not change significantly.

Conclusions

After radical prostatectomy significant changes in bladder and sphincter measurements are noted. Urethral closure pressure, functional urethral length and bladder stability are significantly urodynamic factors that influence continence after radical prostatectomy.     

Urodynamic evaluation of a suspension technique for rapid recovery of continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy

BACKGROUND: We investigated urodynamic findings involved in the rapid recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy with a suspension technique. METHODS: A total of 45 consecutive patients (mean age 67.6 years) who had undergone radical retropubic prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer were evaluated with multichannel urodynamics including the maximal urethral pressure (MUP), functional urethral length (FUL), maximal cystometric capacity (MCC) and abdominal leak point pressure (ALPP) at base line, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively. The suspension of vesicourethral anastomosis preserving anterior attachments of puboprostatic ligaments to pubic bone was performed in 33 patients. Twelve patients did not undergo the suspension technique. RESULTS: The continence rates at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after radical prostatectomy in the suspension group were significantly higher than those in the non-suspension group: 67% versus 0% at 1 week (P < 0.001), 82% versus 25% at 1 month (P < 0.001), and 91% versus 50% at 3 months (P < 0.01), respectively. Postoperative ALPP at all points of measurement was significantly higher in the suspension group than in the non-suspension group (P < 0.0002). There was no difference in MUP, FUL or MCC at each point following radical prostatectomy between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: These observations suggest that preserving anterior attachments of puboprostatic ligaments to pubic bone and fixation of urethral hyper-mobility by the suspension of vesicourethral anastomosis promotes rapid recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy.     

Urodynamic changes after radical prostatectomy

Summary Urodynamic examinations were performed in 82 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer before and after radical prostatectomy. A significant decrease in bladder capacity (396 ml to 331.9 ml), urethral closure pressure (89.6 cm H₂O to 65.,2 cm H₂O) and functional profile length (61 mm to 25.9 mm) was noted. The continence rate after radical prostatectomy was 33.4 % after 1 month, 69.4 % after 3 months, 84.7 % after 6 months, and 90.9 % after 12 months, respectively. A correlation was found between urethral closure pressure and functional profile length and continence. A second urodynamic examination was performed 6 months after radical prostatectomy. Functional profile length and urethral closure pressure increased. These data suggest that restoration of continence is based on sphincteric parameters.      

Delayed recovery of urinary continence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

AIM: To study the rate at which patients regained urinary continence during our institution's early experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. METHODS: The urinary continence of 34 patients was recorded at various intervals following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. These data were compared with those from 49 patients who had undergone radical retropubic prostatectomy. RESULTS: For laparoscopic prostatectomy patients, 2.9% had regained urinary continence at 1 month, 29.4% at 3 months, 46.9% at 6 months, 56.0% at 9 months and 60.0% at 12 months. For retropubic prostatectomy patients, the corresponding rates were 22.4% at 1 month, 63.3% at 3 months, 84.1% at 6 months, 92.9% at 9 months and 92.9% at 12 months. Backward stepwise logistic regression analysis indicated that laparoscopic surgery itself significantly predicted urinary incontinence at every interval from 1 to 9 months following surgery (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients' postoperative recovery of urinary continence was not satisfactory in our early experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Further efforts to elucidate the reason for this poor functional outcome are mandatory before the procedure is accepted as part of standard practice.