Literature DB >> 12796659

A pelvic drain may be avoided after radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Marc Savoie1, Mark S Soloway, Sandy S Kim, M Manoharan.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We reassessed the role of routine pelvic cavity drainage to prevent complications after radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: RRP was performed in 116 consecutive patients with clinically localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Clinical and pathological information was recorded for each patient. After the prostate was removed and the anastomotic sutures were tied the bladder was filled with saline through the urethral catheter. If there was no significant leakage, a drain was not placed.
RESULTS: We did not place a drain in 85 of the 116 patients (73%). There were 3 immediate postoperative complications. In a patient without a drain, a urinoma developed that required percutaneous placement of a drain on postoperative day 2. None of the 116 patients had clinical evidence of infection, lymphocele or hematoma. Two patients had hematuria 2 weeks after catheter removal and needed bladder irrigation. Neither patient had a drain. Three patients (drain and no drain in 1 each) were in urinary retention after catheter removal, which required catheter reinsertion for an additional week. None had an anastomotic stricture.
CONCLUSIONS: The morbidity of RRP is low when performed by those who regularly perform this procedure. If the bladder neck is preserved or meticulously reconstructed, there may be little or no extravasation and, thus, routine drainage may be unnecessary. In properly selected cases morbidity is not increased by omitting a drain from the pelvic cavity after RRP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12796659     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000068724.33478.2c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  4 in total

Review 1.  [Fast-track surgery in radical retropubic prostatectomy. First experiences with a comprehensive program to enhance postoperative convalescence].

Authors:  H Heinzer; R Heuer; O V Nordenflycht; C Eichelberg; P Friederich; A E Goetz; H Huland
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  How to minimize lymphoceles and treat clinically symptomatic lymphoceles after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Hak J Lee; Christopher J Kane
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Review of the use of prophylactic drain tubes post-robotic radical prostatectomy: Dogma or decent practice?

Authors:  Tatenda C Nzenza; Simeon Ngweso; Renu Eapen; Nieroshan Rajarubendra; Damien Bolton; Declan Murphy; Nathan Lawrentschuk
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2020-06-09

4.  A prospective comparative study of routine versus deferred pelvic drain placement after radical prostatectomy: impact on complications and opioid use.

Authors:  Mitchell M Huang; Hiten D Patel; Zhuo T Su; Christian P Pavlovich; Alan W Partin; Phillip M Pierorazio; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 4.226

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.