腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术中背侧血管复合体的非结扎方法及耻骨前列腺韧带和盆腔内筋膜的保存:对尿失禁的影响。

IF 1 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Turkish journal of urology Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.5152/tud.2022.22113
José Gaona, Margarita M Zuluaga, Daniel H Flórez, Francia M Muñoz, Raul Rueda, Jairo Ortiz, Daniel E Sánchez, Cesar Gonzalez, Fabio Gonzalez, Angélica M Rueda, Sebastian Ortiz
{"title":"腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术中背侧血管复合体的非结扎方法及耻骨前列腺韧带和盆腔内筋膜的保存:对尿失禁的影响。","authors":"José Gaona,&nbsp;Margarita M Zuluaga,&nbsp;Daniel H Flórez,&nbsp;Francia M Muñoz,&nbsp;Raul Rueda,&nbsp;Jairo Ortiz,&nbsp;Daniel E Sánchez,&nbsp;Cesar Gonzalez,&nbsp;Fabio Gonzalez,&nbsp;Angélica M Rueda,&nbsp;Sebastian Ortiz","doi":"10.5152/tud.2022.22113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the impact on continence rate during 1-year follow-up of a preservation technique that included nonligation of the dorsal vascular complex and sparing of the puboprostatic ligaments and the endopelvic fascia during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Information from 30 patients who underwent the preservation technique was prospectively collected and compared with data from 60 patients who underwent the nonpreservation traditional technique. A single surgeon performed all procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Demographic and preoperative characteristics were similar. The mean patient age was 59 years in both groups. All patients were stage cT1c or cT2. Operative time was significantly lower in the preservation technique group (229.6 vs. 262.7 minutes, P < .001). There were no significant differences in intraoperative bleeding, discharge hemoglobin level, blood transfusion rate, length of hospitalization, and drop in the hemoglobin level. The probability of continence recovery was significantly higher in the preservation technique group than in the traditional technique group (hazard ratio = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.31-0.81). The continence rate (0 pads/day) for the preservation technique group versus the traditional technique group at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was, respectively, 53.3% versus 30% (P = .031), 90% versus 45% (P < .001), 90% versus 63.3% (P = .008), and 96.6% versus 78.3% (P = .024). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding potency and oncologic outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nonligation of the dorsal vascular complex and preservation of the puboprostatic ligaments and the endopelvic fascia improved urinary continence compared with the traditional nonpreservation technique, with no impact in terms of bleeding and oncologic outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":23366,"journal":{"name":"Turkish journal of urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9623387/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dorsal Vascular Complex Nonligation Method and Preservation of Puboprostatic Ligaments and Endopelvic Fascia During Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Effect on Continence.\",\"authors\":\"José Gaona,&nbsp;Margarita M Zuluaga,&nbsp;Daniel H Flórez,&nbsp;Francia M Muñoz,&nbsp;Raul Rueda,&nbsp;Jairo Ortiz,&nbsp;Daniel E Sánchez,&nbsp;Cesar Gonzalez,&nbsp;Fabio Gonzalez,&nbsp;Angélica M Rueda,&nbsp;Sebastian Ortiz\",\"doi\":\"10.5152/tud.2022.22113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the impact on continence rate during 1-year follow-up of a preservation technique that included nonligation of the dorsal vascular complex and sparing of the puboprostatic ligaments and the endopelvic fascia during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Information from 30 patients who underwent the preservation technique was prospectively collected and compared with data from 60 patients who underwent the nonpreservation traditional technique. A single surgeon performed all procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Demographic and preoperative characteristics were similar. The mean patient age was 59 years in both groups. All patients were stage cT1c or cT2. Operative time was significantly lower in the preservation technique group (229.6 vs. 262.7 minutes, P < .001). There were no significant differences in intraoperative bleeding, discharge hemoglobin level, blood transfusion rate, length of hospitalization, and drop in the hemoglobin level. The probability of continence recovery was significantly higher in the preservation technique group than in the traditional technique group (hazard ratio = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.31-0.81). The continence rate (0 pads/day) for the preservation technique group versus the traditional technique group at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was, respectively, 53.3% versus 30% (P = .031), 90% versus 45% (P < .001), 90% versus 63.3% (P = .008), and 96.6% versus 78.3% (P = .024). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding potency and oncologic outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nonligation of the dorsal vascular complex and preservation of the puboprostatic ligaments and the endopelvic fascia improved urinary continence compared with the traditional nonpreservation technique, with no impact in terms of bleeding and oncologic outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23366,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish journal of urology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9623387/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish journal of urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2022.22113\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish journal of urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2022.22113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价在腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术中,不结扎背侧血管复群、保留耻骨前列腺韧带和盆腔内筋膜的保留技术对1年随访期间尿失禁率的影响。材料和方法:前瞻性地收集了30例采用保存技术的患者的资料,并与60例采用传统非保存技术的患者的资料进行了比较。一个外科医生完成了所有的手术。结果:人口学特征和术前特征相似。两组患者平均年龄均为59岁。所有患者均为cT1c或cT2期。保存术组手术时间明显低于保存术组(229.6分钟vs 262.7分钟,P < 0.001)。两组在术中出血量、出院血红蛋白水平、输血率、住院时间、血红蛋白水平下降等方面差异无统计学意义。保存技术组尿失禁恢复的概率显著高于传统技术组(风险比= 0.50,95% CI = 0.31 ~ 0.81)。保存技术组与传统技术组在1、3、6、12个月的尿失禁率(0片/天)分别为53.3%对30% (P = 0.031)、90%对45% (P < 0.001)、90%对63.3% (P = 0.008)、96.6%对78.3% (P = 0.024)。两组之间在效力和肿瘤预后方面没有显著差异。结论:与传统的不结扎技术相比,不结扎背侧血管复合体并保留耻骨前列腺韧带和盆腔内筋膜可改善尿失禁,对出血和肿瘤预后无影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dorsal Vascular Complex Nonligation Method and Preservation of Puboprostatic Ligaments and Endopelvic Fascia During Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Effect on Continence.

Objective: To evaluate the impact on continence rate during 1-year follow-up of a preservation technique that included nonligation of the dorsal vascular complex and sparing of the puboprostatic ligaments and the endopelvic fascia during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Material and methods: Information from 30 patients who underwent the preservation technique was prospectively collected and compared with data from 60 patients who underwent the nonpreservation traditional technique. A single surgeon performed all procedures.

Results: Demographic and preoperative characteristics were similar. The mean patient age was 59 years in both groups. All patients were stage cT1c or cT2. Operative time was significantly lower in the preservation technique group (229.6 vs. 262.7 minutes, P < .001). There were no significant differences in intraoperative bleeding, discharge hemoglobin level, blood transfusion rate, length of hospitalization, and drop in the hemoglobin level. The probability of continence recovery was significantly higher in the preservation technique group than in the traditional technique group (hazard ratio = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.31-0.81). The continence rate (0 pads/day) for the preservation technique group versus the traditional technique group at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was, respectively, 53.3% versus 30% (P = .031), 90% versus 45% (P < .001), 90% versus 63.3% (P = .008), and 96.6% versus 78.3% (P = .024). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding potency and oncologic outcomes.

Conclusion: Nonligation of the dorsal vascular complex and preservation of the puboprostatic ligaments and the endopelvic fascia improved urinary continence compared with the traditional nonpreservation technique, with no impact in terms of bleeding and oncologic outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Turkish journal of urology
Turkish journal of urology Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: The aim of the Turkish Journal of Urology is to contribute to the literature by publishing scientifically high-quality research articles as well as reviews, editorials, letters to the editor and case reports. The journal’s target audience includes, urology specialists, medical specialty fellows and other specialists and practitioners who are interested in the field of urology.
期刊最新文献
Infertility as a Proxy of Men's Health: Still a Long Way to Go. Strategies in Infertile Azoospermic Patients with Negative Microdissection Testicular Sperm Extraction Surgery. General Management of Female Sexual Dysfunction for Urologists. Strategies to Increase Testosterone in Men Seeking Fertility. Do Sleep Disorders Influence the Prognosis and the Response to the Therapy in Enuretic Children?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1