SIU-WJU Article of the Month – August 2017
Transperineal Approach for Highly Recurrent Anastomotic Strictures After Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: A Viable Approach
SIU Academy®. Panda A. 08/01/17; 193796
Topic: SurgeryTransperineal Approach for Highly Recurrent Anastomotic Strictures After Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: A Viable Approach
Abstract
Discussion Forum (0)
Rate & Comment (0)
Objectives
To re-evaluate safety and efficacy of transperineal reanastomosis (TPRA) as a viable therapeutic option in highly recurrent anastomotic strictures (AS) after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP).
Methods
Retrospective analysis by standardized questionnaire inquiring for recurrence of stricture, stress urinary incontinence (SUI), sexual function, satisfaction, and changes in quality of life (QoL) was performed in all patients undergoing TPRA. Validated questionnaires (ICIQ-UI, EQ-5D, and IPSS) were included.
Results
Median follow-up was 45.0 months. The average number of prior operations was 4.69. Success rate was 87% (20/23). Three recurrences were successfully treated via endoscopic means. All patients had urinary incontinence pre-op and post-op. Implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has been performed successfully in 73.9% (17/23). Rate of complications was low (8.7%; 2/23, Clavien–Dindo Grade II + III). EQ-5D-VAS showed a good general state of health (73.5/100). An improvement in QoL was noted in 63.6% (14/22) and patient satisfaction was high (72.7%; 16/22).
Conclusion
This extended follow-up confirms the initial results for TPRA as an excellent treatment option for highly recurrent AS after RRP. Postoperative SUI as a consequence of transsphincteric urethral mobilization can be satisfactorily treated by the implantation of AUS. In case of AS recalcitrant to endoscopic treatment, the described procedure—even though technically challenging—represents a valuable treatment option.
Keywords
Transperineal reanastomosis Recurrent anastomotic stricture Radical prostatectomy Reconstructive urology
Abbreviations
AS Anastomotic stricture
RRP Retropubic prostatectomy
TPRA Transperineal reanastomosis
SUI Stress urinary incontinence
AUS Artificial urinary sphincter
To re-evaluate safety and efficacy of transperineal reanastomosis (TPRA) as a viable therapeutic option in highly recurrent anastomotic strictures (AS) after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP).
Methods
Retrospective analysis by standardized questionnaire inquiring for recurrence of stricture, stress urinary incontinence (SUI), sexual function, satisfaction, and changes in quality of life (QoL) was performed in all patients undergoing TPRA. Validated questionnaires (ICIQ-UI, EQ-5D, and IPSS) were included.
Results
Median follow-up was 45.0 months. The average number of prior operations was 4.69. Success rate was 87% (20/23). Three recurrences were successfully treated via endoscopic means. All patients had urinary incontinence pre-op and post-op. Implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has been performed successfully in 73.9% (17/23). Rate of complications was low (8.7%; 2/23, Clavien–Dindo Grade II + III). EQ-5D-VAS showed a good general state of health (73.5/100). An improvement in QoL was noted in 63.6% (14/22) and patient satisfaction was high (72.7%; 16/22).
Conclusion
This extended follow-up confirms the initial results for TPRA as an excellent treatment option for highly recurrent AS after RRP. Postoperative SUI as a consequence of transsphincteric urethral mobilization can be satisfactorily treated by the implantation of AUS. In case of AS recalcitrant to endoscopic treatment, the described procedure—even though technically challenging—represents a valuable treatment option.
Keywords
Transperineal reanastomosis Recurrent anastomotic stricture Radical prostatectomy Reconstructive urology
Abbreviations
AS Anastomotic stricture
RRP Retropubic prostatectomy
TPRA Transperineal reanastomosis
SUI Stress urinary incontinence
AUS Artificial urinary sphincter
Objectives
To re-evaluate safety and efficacy of transperineal reanastomosis (TPRA) as a viable therapeutic option in highly recurrent anastomotic strictures (AS) after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP).
Methods
Retrospective analysis by standardized questionnaire inquiring for recurrence of stricture, stress urinary incontinence (SUI), sexual function, satisfaction, and changes in quality of life (QoL) was performed in all patients undergoing TPRA. Validated questionnaires (ICIQ-UI, EQ-5D, and IPSS) were included.
Results
Median follow-up was 45.0 months. The average number of prior operations was 4.69. Success rate was 87% (20/23). Three recurrences were successfully treated via endoscopic means. All patients had urinary incontinence pre-op and post-op. Implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has been performed successfully in 73.9% (17/23). Rate of complications was low (8.7%; 2/23, Clavien–Dindo Grade II + III). EQ-5D-VAS showed a good general state of health (73.5/100). An improvement in QoL was noted in 63.6% (14/22) and patient satisfaction was high (72.7%; 16/22).
Conclusion
This extended follow-up confirms the initial results for TPRA as an excellent treatment option for highly recurrent AS after RRP. Postoperative SUI as a consequence of transsphincteric urethral mobilization can be satisfactorily treated by the implantation of AUS. In case of AS recalcitrant to endoscopic treatment, the described procedure—even though technically challenging—represents a valuable treatment option.
Keywords
Transperineal reanastomosis Recurrent anastomotic stricture Radical prostatectomy Reconstructive urology
Abbreviations
AS Anastomotic stricture
RRP Retropubic prostatectomy
TPRA Transperineal reanastomosis
SUI Stress urinary incontinence
AUS Artificial urinary sphincter
To re-evaluate safety and efficacy of transperineal reanastomosis (TPRA) as a viable therapeutic option in highly recurrent anastomotic strictures (AS) after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP).
Methods
Retrospective analysis by standardized questionnaire inquiring for recurrence of stricture, stress urinary incontinence (SUI), sexual function, satisfaction, and changes in quality of life (QoL) was performed in all patients undergoing TPRA. Validated questionnaires (ICIQ-UI, EQ-5D, and IPSS) were included.
Results
Median follow-up was 45.0 months. The average number of prior operations was 4.69. Success rate was 87% (20/23). Three recurrences were successfully treated via endoscopic means. All patients had urinary incontinence pre-op and post-op. Implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) has been performed successfully in 73.9% (17/23). Rate of complications was low (8.7%; 2/23, Clavien–Dindo Grade II + III). EQ-5D-VAS showed a good general state of health (73.5/100). An improvement in QoL was noted in 63.6% (14/22) and patient satisfaction was high (72.7%; 16/22).
Conclusion
This extended follow-up confirms the initial results for TPRA as an excellent treatment option for highly recurrent AS after RRP. Postoperative SUI as a consequence of transsphincteric urethral mobilization can be satisfactorily treated by the implantation of AUS. In case of AS recalcitrant to endoscopic treatment, the described procedure—even though technically challenging—represents a valuable treatment option.
Keywords
Transperineal reanastomosis Recurrent anastomotic stricture Radical prostatectomy Reconstructive urology
Abbreviations
AS Anastomotic stricture
RRP Retropubic prostatectomy
TPRA Transperineal reanastomosis
SUI Stress urinary incontinence
AUS Artificial urinary sphincter
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
{{ help_message }}
{{filter}}