Literature DB >> 29177945

Removing the urinary catheter on post-operative day 2 after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a feasibility study from a single high-volume referral centre.

Aldo Brassetti1, Flavia Proietti2, Antonio Cardi3, Antonio De Vico3, Antonio Iannello3, Alberto Pansadoro3, Aldo Scapellato3, Tommaso Riga3, Paolo Emiliozzi3, Gianluca D'Elia3.   

Abstract

The indwelling urinary catheter (UC) is a significant bother for men after radical prostatectomy (RP) and should be removed as soon as possible without jeopardizing the outcome. Our aim was to assess the feasibility and safety of its removal on postoperative day (POD) 2 after robot-assisted laparoscopic RP (RALP). A consecutive series of patients undergoing RALP for localized prostate cancer (PCa) were prospectively enrolled. Inclusion criteria were: no bladder-neck reconstruction, watertight urethrovesical anastomosis at 150 ml filling, ≤ 200 ml of intraoperative bleeding, ≤ 80 ml of fluid from the drain on POD 1, clear urine from the UC on POD 2. Patients were discharged on POD 2. Continence was assessed at catheter removal and 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery. Urethrovesical anastomosis was performed with a standard technique on 3 layers. Sixty-six patients were enrolled. The UC was removed on POD 2 in all the cases and 96.4% of the patients were discharged on POD 2. Re-catheterization was needed 16 times and it was always performed easily. Twenty-four complications were reported by 20 patients, mostly Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade II; 2 CD IIIB complications were observed. No anastomotic strictures were diagnosed. At catheter removal, 29% of the patients were completely continent, 41% at 1 month, 67% at 3 months and 92% at 6 months. In selected patients, removing the UC 48 h after RALP is feasible and safe and has no negative impact on continence if compared with the best international standards.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Robotic surgery; Urinary catheter

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29177945     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-017-0765-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  30 in total

1.  Suprapubic versus transurethral bladder drainage after radical prostatectomy: impact on patient discomfort.

Authors:  Seiichi Orikasa; Koichi Kanbe; Shuichi Shirai; Ichiro Shintaku; Seiichi Kurosu
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 3.369

Review 2.  Safety and outcome of early catheter removal after radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Rabi Tiguert; Jérôme Rigaud; Yves Fradet
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 3.  Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Walter Artibani; Andrea Cestari; Antonio Galfano; Markus Graefen; Giorgio Guazzoni; Bertrand Guillonneau; Mani Menon; Francesco Montorsi; Vipul Patel; Jens Rassweiler; Hendrik Van Poppel
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-01-25       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Radiographic assessment of the vesicourethral anastomosis directing early decatheterization following nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Authors:  D P Dalton; A J Schaeffer; J E Garnett; J T Grayhack
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Early removal of urinary catheter after radical retropubic prostatectomy is both feasible and desirable.

Authors:  H Lepor; A M Nieder; M C Fraiman
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Cancer Statistics, 2017.

Authors:  Rebecca L Siegel; Kimberly D Miller; Ahmedin Jemal
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Early removal of the catheter after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  A Nadu; L Salomon; A Hoznek; L E Olsson; F Saint; A de La Taille; A Cicco; D Chopin; C C Abbou
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 8.  The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System.

Authors:  Jonathan I Epstein; Lars Egevad; Mahul B Amin; Brett Delahunt; John R Srigley; Peter A Humphrey
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 6.394

9.  Removal of urinary catheter on postoperative day 3 or 4 after radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Rupa Patel; Herbert Lepor
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Xiangmei Gu; Stuart R Lipsitz; Michael J Barry; Anthony V D'Amico; Aaron C Weinberg; Nancy L Keating
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  1 in total

1.  Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery or fast track surgery pathways in minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhengtong Lv; Yi Cai; Huichuan Jiang; Changzhao Yang; Congyi Tang; Haozhe Xu; Zhi Li; Benyi Fan; Yuan Li
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-06
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.