D Pfalzgraf1,2, T Worst3, J Kranz4,5, J Steffens4, G Salomon6, M Fisch7, C P Reiß7, M W Vetterlein7, C M Rosenbaum3,8. 1. Heilig-Geist-Hospital, Bensheim, Germany. daniel.pfalzgraf@medma.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. University Medical Centre Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany. daniel.pfalzgraf@medma.uni-heidelberg.de. 3. University Medical Centre Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany. 4. St.-Antonius-Hospital, Eschweiler, Germany. 5. University Medical Centre Halle, Halle, Germany. 6. Martini-Clinic, Prostate Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 7. University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 8. Asklepios Clinic Hamburg Barmbek, Barmbek, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the predictors of recurrence and of de novo incontinence in patients treated by transurethral incision or resection for vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) after radical prostatectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients undergoing endoscopic treatment for VUAS between March 2009 and October 2016 were identified in our multi-institutional database. Digital chart reviews were performed and patients contacted for follow-up. Recurrence was defined as any need for further instrumentation or surgery, and de-novo-incontinence as patient-reported outcome. RESULTS: Of 103 patients undergoing endoscopic VUAS treatment, 67 (65%) underwent transurethral resection (TR) and 36 (35%) transurethral incision (TI). TI was performed more frequently as primary treatment compared to TR (58% vs. 37%; p = 0.041). Primary and repeated treatment was performed in 46 (45%) and 57 patients (55%), respectively. Overall, 38 patients (37%) had a history of radiation therapy. There was no difference in time to recurrence for primary vs repeat VUAS treatment, previous vs no radiation, TR compared to TI (all p > 0.08). Regarding treatment success, no difference was found for primary vs. repeat VUAS treatment (50% vs. 37%), previous radiation vs. no radiation (42% vs. 43%), and TR vs. TI (37% vs. 53%; all p ≥ 0.1). Postoperative de novo incontinence was more common after TI vs. TR (31% vs. 12%; p = 0.032), no difference was observed for previous radiation therapy vs. no radiation therapy (18% vs. 18%; p > 0.9) or primary vs. repeat VUAS treatment (22% vs. 16%; p = 0.5). CONCLUSION: VUAS recurrence after endoscopic treatment is not predictable. Endoscopic treatment with TI showed a higher risk for de novo incontinence than TR, and previous irradiation and the number of treatments do not influence incontinence.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the predictors of recurrence and of de novo incontinence in patients treated by transurethral incision or resection for vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) after radical prostatectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients undergoing endoscopic treatment for VUAS between March 2009 and October 2016 were identified in our multi-institutional database. Digital chart reviews were performed and patients contacted for follow-up. Recurrence was defined as any need for further instrumentation or surgery, and de-novo-incontinence as patient-reported outcome. RESULTS: Of 103 patients undergoing endoscopic VUAS treatment, 67 (65%) underwent transurethral resection (TR) and 36 (35%) transurethral incision (TI). TI was performed more frequently as primary treatment compared to TR (58% vs. 37%; p = 0.041). Primary and repeated treatment was performed in 46 (45%) and 57 patients (55%), respectively. Overall, 38 patients (37%) had a history of radiation therapy. There was no difference in time to recurrence for primary vs repeat VUAS treatment, previous vs no radiation, TR compared to TI (all p > 0.08). Regarding treatment success, no difference was found for primary vs. repeat VUAS treatment (50% vs. 37%), previous radiation vs. no radiation (42% vs. 43%), and TR vs. TI (37% vs. 53%; all p ≥ 0.1). Postoperative de novo incontinence was more common after TI vs. TR (31% vs. 12%; p = 0.032), no difference was observed for previous radiation therapy vs. no radiation therapy (18% vs. 18%; p > 0.9) or primary vs. repeat VUAS treatment (22% vs. 16%; p = 0.5). CONCLUSION:VUAS recurrence after endoscopic treatment is not predictable. Endoscopic treatment with TI showed a higher risk for de novo incontinence than TR, and previous irradiation and the number of treatments do not influence incontinence.
Authors: Daniel Ramirez; Lee C Zhao; Aditya Bagrodia; J Francis Scott; Steven J Hudak; Allen F Morey Journal: Urology Date: 2013-09-18 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Lambda P Msezane; W Stuart Reynolds; Ofer N Gofrit; Arieh L Shalhav; Gregory P Zagaja; Kevin C Zorn Journal: J Endourol Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 2.942