Archivio italiano di urologia, andrologia : organo ufficiale [di] Societa italiana di ecografia urologica e nefrologica · 2021
Reconstruction of the Denonvillier's fascia and posterior ligament of the external urethral sphincter: Assessment of its effect on urinary continence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Passos Pedro Sousa, Anacleto Sara Teixeira, Versos Rui Simeão, Alves Mário Cerqueira, Mota Paulo Oliveira
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Some studies have shown that rhabdosphincter reconstruction provides an earlier return to continence after radical prostatectomy. We aim to study the impact of this procedure in urinary continence along with comparing two specific surgical techniques for posterior reconstruction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied a group of patients who were submitted to LRP with No Rhabdosphincter Reconstruction (NRR) and another group with Posterior Reconstruction of the Rhabdosphincter (PRR). The latter was further divided into two groups: "Rocco type stitch" group and "Bollens type stitch" group. We used three questionnaires (IIEF-5, ICIQ-SF and IPSS) to assess urinary continence and erectile function 90 days after surgery.
RESULTS: Patients of PRR group had a better full continence rate than patients of NRR group at 90 days (96.6% vs 33.3%, p < 0.001). Concerning urinary incontinence (p = 0.116), lower urinary tract symptoms (p = 0.543) and postoperative complication rates (p = 0.738), our results suggested that there were no differences between the techniques studied.
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter has significant benefits for urinary continence recovery on patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. No differences were observed in continence recovery between the two techniques analyzed. Additionally, reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter appears to be a safe procedure with no increased risk of postoperative complications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied a group of patients who were submitted to LRP with No Rhabdosphincter Reconstruction (NRR) and another group with Posterior Reconstruction of the Rhabdosphincter (PRR). The latter was further divided into two groups: "Rocco type stitch" group and "Bollens type stitch" group. We used three questionnaires (IIEF-5, ICIQ-SF and IPSS) to assess urinary continence and erectile function 90 days after surgery.
RESULTS: Patients of PRR group had a better full continence rate than patients of NRR group at 90 days (96.6% vs 33.3%, p < 0.001). Concerning urinary incontinence (p = 0.116), lower urinary tract symptoms (p = 0.543) and postoperative complication rates (p = 0.738), our results suggested that there were no differences between the techniques studied.
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter has significant benefits for urinary continence recovery on patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. No differences were observed in continence recovery between the two techniques analyzed. Additionally, reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter appears to be a safe procedure with no increased risk of postoperative complications.