Literature DB >> 28181381

Changes in penile length after radical prostatectomy: investigation of the underlying anatomical mechanism.

Yoshifumi Kadono1, Kazuaki Machioka1, Kazufumi Nakashima1, Masashi Iijima1, Kazuyoshi Shigehara1, Takahiro Nohara1, Kazutaka Narimoto1, Kouji Izumi1, Yasuhide Kitagawa1, Hiroyuki Konaka1, Toshifumi Gabata2, Atsushi Mizokami1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To measure changes in penile length (PL) over time before and after radical prostatectomy (RP), and to investigate the underlying mechanisms for these changes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The stretched PL (SPL) of 102 patients was measured before, 10 days after, and at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months after RP. The perpendicular distance from the distal end of the membranous urethra to the midline of the pelvic outlet was measured on mid-sagittal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) slice at three time points: preoperatively; 10 days after RP; and 12 months after RP. Pre- and postoperative SPLs were compared using paired Student's t-test. Predictors of PL shortening at 10 days and at 12 months after RP were evaluated on univariate and multivariate analyses.
RESULTS: The SPL was shortest 10 days after RP (mean PL shortening from preoperative level: 19.9 mm), and gradually recovered thereafter. SPL at 12 months after RP was not significantly different from preoperative SPL. On MRI examination, the distal end of membranous urethra was found to have moved proximally (mean proximal displacement: 3.9 mm) at 10 days after RP, and to have returned to the preoperative position at 12 months after RP. On univariate analysis, only the volume of the removed prostate was a predictor of SPL change at 10 days after surgery; on multivariate analysis, the association was not statistically significant. No predictor of SPL change was found at 12 months after RP.
CONCLUSION: The SPL was shortest at 10 days after RP and gradually recovered thereafter in the present study. Anatomically, the glans and corpus spongiosum surrounding the urethra are an integral structure, and the proximal urethra is drawn into the pelvis during urethrovesical anastomosis. This is the first report showing that slight vertical repositioning of the membranous urethra after RP causes changes in SPL over time. These results can help inform patients about changes in penile appearance after RP.
© 2017 The Authors BJU International © 2017 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  anatomical mechanism; membranous urethra; penile length; radical prostatectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28181381     DOI: 10.1111/bju.13777

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  12 in total

1.  Comparative analysis of penile implants in patients with vasculogenic erectile dysfunction versus postradical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction.

Authors:  R Cocera; J Torremade; J F Suarez; J Fernandez-Concha; F Vigues
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 2.896

Review 2.  Focusing on sexual rehabilitation besides penile rehabilitation following radical prostatectomy is important.

Authors:  Daphné Vanderhaeghe; Maarten Albersen; Emmanuel Weyne
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 2.896

3.  Current state of image-guided focal therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Rafael R Tourinho-Barbosa; Bradford J Wood; Andre Luis Abreu; Bruno Nahar; Toshitaka Shin; Selcuk Guven; Thomas J Polascik
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-05-22       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Impact of Pelvic Anatomical Changes Caused by Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Yoshifumi Kadono; Takahiro Nohara; Shohei Kawaguchi; Hiroaki Iwamoto; Hiroshi Yaegashi; Kazuyoshi Shigehara; Kouji Izumi; Atsushi Mizokami
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-21       Impact factor: 6.575

Review 5.  Multidisciplinary approach and management of patients who seek medical advice for penile size concerns: a narrative review.

Authors:  Nicolò Schifano; Omer Onur Cakir; Fabio Castiglione; Francesco Montorsi; Giulio Garaffa
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 2.408

6.  Cognitive function, depression, and anxiety in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy with and without adjuvant treatment.

Authors:  Piotr Jarzemski; Bartosz Brzoszczyk; Alicja Popiołek; Agnieszka Stachowicz-Karpińska; Szymon Gołota; Maciej Bieliński; Alina Borkowska
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2019-04-05       Impact factor: 2.570

7.  Three novel methods to measure the postoperative displacement of lower urinary tract structures following radical prostatectomy in a sample of Korean patients.

Authors:  Hong Koo Ha; Henk B Luiting; Petra L Graham; Manish I Patel; Jaspreet S Sandhu; Oguz Akin; Sean F Mungovan
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 2.264

8.  Adherence and barriers to penile rehabilitation over 2 years following radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jeffrey Albaugh; Brittany Adamic; Cecilia Chang; Nicholas Kirwen; Joshua Aizen
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2019-10-07       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 9.  Mapping the prevalence and use of questionnaires to detect the neglected sexual side effects after prostate cancer treatment: a scoping review.

Authors:  Pierre Röscher; Ronisha Sathiram; Joanne E Milios; Jacqueline M van Wyk
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2022-01-03

10.  Impact of Retzius-sparing Versus Standard Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy on Penile Shortening, Peyronie's Disease, and Inguinal Hernia Sequelae.

Authors:  Keith J Kowalczyk; Meghan Davis; John O'Neill; Harry Lee; Joanna Orzel; Rachel S Rubin; Jim C Hu
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2020-10-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.