André N Vis1, Henk G van der Poel2, Annebeth E C Ruiter3, Jim C Hu4, Ashutosh K Tewari5, Bernardo Rocco6, Vipul R Patel7, Sanjay Razdan8, Jakko A Nieuwenhuijzen3. 1. VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: a.vis@vumc.nl. 2. Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. New York Presbyterian/Weill Cornell, New York, NY, USA. 5. Icahn School of Medicine of Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. 6. University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy. 7. Global Robotics Institute, Florida Hospital Celebration Health, Orlando, FL, USA. 8. International Robotic Prostatectomy Institute, Miami, FL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is hampered by side effects that may have a serious impact on quality of life, particularly stress urinary incontinence. Continence rates may be improved by surgical reconstruction of the pelvic floor. OBJECTIVE: Video illustrations of different surgical techniques may be particularly worthwhile for practicing urologists in understanding the pelvic-floor anatomy and in the training of residents and fellows in urology. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We describe and video-illustrate commonly performed pelvic reconstructive techniques in RARP, as performed by experts in the field. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Surgical techniques have been described, such as posterior musculofascial reconstruction, anterior reconstruction and periurethral suspension, preservation of membranous urethral lengthening, bladder-neck reconstruction, and combinations. MEASUREMENTS: An overview of continence rates of the different techniques is given. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: All reconstructive surgical techniques result in similar short-term continence rates and good-to-excellent outcomes 1yr after surgery. There are only a few randomized clinical trials comparing a reconstructive technique with "no reconstruction" or a different reconstructive technique, and outcomes are conflicting. CONCLUSIONS: Although many of the procedures report a benefit with respect to early continence, benefits seem to diminish with longer follow-up. Whether any of the reconstructive techniques is superior to another is a matter of study. PATIENT SUMMARY: Early continence rates might be improved by surgical reconstruction of the pelvic floor.
BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is hampered by side effects that may have a serious impact on quality of life, particularly stress urinary incontinence. Continence rates may be improved by surgical reconstruction of the pelvic floor. OBJECTIVE: Video illustrations of different surgical techniques may be particularly worthwhile for practicing urologists in understanding the pelvic-floor anatomy and in the training of residents and fellows in urology. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We describe and video-illustrate commonly performed pelvic reconstructive techniques in RARP, as performed by experts in the field. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Surgical techniques have been described, such as posterior musculofascial reconstruction, anterior reconstruction and periurethral suspension, preservation of membranous urethral lengthening, bladder-neck reconstruction, and combinations. MEASUREMENTS: An overview of continence rates of the different techniques is given. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: All reconstructive surgical techniques result in similar short-term continence rates and good-to-excellent outcomes 1yr after surgery. There are only a few randomized clinical trials comparing a reconstructive technique with "no reconstruction" or a different reconstructive technique, and outcomes are conflicting. CONCLUSIONS: Although many of the procedures report a benefit with respect to early continence, benefits seem to diminish with longer follow-up. Whether any of the reconstructive techniques is superior to another is a matter of study. PATIENT SUMMARY: Early continence rates might be improved by surgical reconstruction of the pelvic floor.
Authors: Peter A Elliott; Stephanie Hsiang; Ramkishen Narayanan; James Bierylo; Shu-Ching Chang; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Timothy G Wilson Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2021-01-11
Authors: Mike Wenzel; Felix Preisser; Matthias Mueller; Lena H Theissen; Maria N Welte; Benedikt Hoeh; Clara Humke; Simon Bernatz; Boris Bodelle; Christoph Würnschimmel; Derya Tilki; Hartwig Huland; Markus Graefen; Frederik C Roos; Andreas Becker; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Felix K H Chun; Luis A Kluth; Philipp Mandel Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2021-02-19 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Eelco R P Collette; Sjoerd O Klaver; Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte; Dies van den Ouden; Reindert J A van Moorselaar; André N Vis Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2020-09-15
Authors: Jim C Hu; Behfar Ehdaie; Jaspreet Sandhu; Daniel D Sjoberg; Sigrid V Carlsson; Michael Tzeng; Andrew J Vickers Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2020-11-08