Peng Xu1, Abai Xu1, Binshen Chen1, Shaobo Zheng1, Yawen Xu1, Hulin Li1, Bingkun Li1, Peng Huang1,2, Yiming Zhang1, Yukun Ge1, Chunxiao Liu3. 1. Department of Urology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, No. 253 Industrial Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510282, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. 2. Innovation Center Okayama for Nanobio-targeted Therapy, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan. 3. Department of Urology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, No. 253 Industrial Road, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, 510282, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. yihuixp88@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To illustrate a ligation-free technique and compare perioperative and postoperative outcomes of this technique versus the standard suture method. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of 233 consecutive patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent ligation-free technique (n = 180, Group 1) or standard ligation (n = 53, Group 2) at an academic institution from February 2010 to January 2014. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Operative time was significantly shorter in Group 1 than in Group 2 (148.47 vs. 164.25 min, p = 0.000). No difference in EBL was noted between the groups (191.11 vs. 185.06 mL, p = 0.055). Postoperative continence rates at 3, 6, and 12 months in Groups 1 and 2 were 40.0 versus 24.5, 54.4 versus 37.7, and 73.9 versus 71.7 %, respectively. These differences were statistically significant. No patient in either group had a positive apical surgical margin. During follow-up, tumor recurrence or metastasis was not observed in any patient. Limitations of the study include this retrospective study of a single-center experience and lack of potency appraisal. CONCLUSIONS: This present ligation-free technique showed a statistically significant shorter interval to recovery of continence and higher continence rates in short-term postoperative results by contrast to conventional suture ligation, but no significant difference was revealed in long-term urinary control. We offer this technique and the correlative data to provide more information for deeply understanding the precise construction of the dorsal vascular complex and the mechanism of urinary control.
OBJECTIVE: To illustrate a ligation-free technique and compare perioperative and postoperative outcomes of this technique versus the standard suture method. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of 233 consecutive patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent ligation-free technique (n = 180, Group 1) or standard ligation (n = 53, Group 2) at an academic institution from February 2010 to January 2014. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Operative time was significantly shorter in Group 1 than in Group 2 (148.47 vs. 164.25 min, p = 0.000). No difference in EBL was noted between the groups (191.11 vs. 185.06 mL, p = 0.055). Postoperative continence rates at 3, 6, and 12 months in Groups 1 and 2 were 40.0 versus 24.5, 54.4 versus 37.7, and 73.9 versus 71.7 %, respectively. These differences were statistically significant. No patient in either group had a positive apical surgical margin. During follow-up, tumor recurrence or metastasis was not observed in any patient. Limitations of the study include this retrospective study of a single-center experience and lack of potency appraisal. CONCLUSIONS: This present ligation-free technique showed a statistically significant shorter interval to recovery of continence and higher continence rates in short-term postoperative results by contrast to conventional suture ligation, but no significant difference was revealed in long-term urinary control. We offer this technique and the correlative data to provide more information for deeply understanding the precise construction of the dorsal vascular complex and the mechanism of urinary control.
Authors: Yin Lei; Mehrdad Alemozaffar; Stephen B Williams; Nathanael Hevelone; Stuart R Lipsitz; Blakely A Plaster; Channa A Amarasekera; William D Ulmer; Andy C Huang; Keith J Kowalczyk; Jim C Hu Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-09-15 Impact factor: 20.096