Long-term follow-up of patients undergoing percutaneous suprapubic tube drainage after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP)

作者: Jesse D. Sammon , Quoc-Dien Trinh , Shyam Sukumar , Mireya Diaz , Andrea Simone

DOI: 10.1111/J.1464-410X.2011.10786.X

关键词:

摘要: UNLABELLED Study Type - Therapy (case series). Level of Evidence 4 What's known on the subject? and What does study add? • Initial reports percutaneous suprapubic tube (PST) drainage following RARP demonstrated feasibility short-term safety, while decreasing patient discomfort utilization anti-cholinergic medication. This demonstrates long-term safety efficacy bladder by PST; splinting urethrovesical anastomosis is simply not essential if mucosal apposition ensured. OBJECTIVES To evaluate functional outcomes patients undergoing after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between January 2008 October 2009, 339 one surgeon experienced in RA surgery (M.M.) had postoperative with PST a minimum 1-year follow-up for urinary function. Functional were obtained via patient-administered questionnaire. Complications captured exhaustive review multiple datasets, including our prospective prostate cancer database, claims data, as well electronic medical institutional morbidity mortality records. RESULTS Urinary function assessed questionnaire was analysed at mean (sd) 11.5 (1.7) months; placement, 293 (86.4%) total control only nine (2.7%) required >1 pad/day. In all, 86 (25.4%) never wore pad; median time to 0-1 pad/day 2 weeks (interquartile range [IQR] 0,6); 6 (IQR 1,22). The complications 23.7 (6.1) months. 15 (4.4%) procedure-specific complication, which 13 minor (Clavien Class I/II 3.8%); neck contracture. 16 (4.7%) Foley placement gross haematuria (two patients), retention (three), malfunction (four) or need prolonged catheterization (seven). CONCLUSIONS safe efficacious follow-up. Splinting critical step RP watertight excellent are achieved.

参考文章(28)
Daniel P. Dalton, Anthony J. Schaeffer, John E. Garnett, John T. Grayhack, Radiographic assessment of the vesicourethral anastomosis directing early decatheterization following nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 141, pp. 79- 81 ,(1989) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)40595-7
Barbara S Niël-Weise, Peterhans J van den Broek, Urinary catheter policies for short-term bladder drainage in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. ,(2005) , 10.1002/14651858.CD004203.PUB2
J M Albani, C D Zippe, Urethral catheter removal 3 days after radical retropubic prostatectomy is feasible and desirable Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases. ,vol. 5, pp. 291- 295 ,(2002) , 10.1038/SJ.PCAN.4500601
C.C Abbou, L Salomon, A Hoznek, P Antiphon, A Cicco, F Saint, W Alame, J Bellot, D.K Chopin, Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Urology. ,vol. 55, pp. 630- 633 ,(2000) , 10.1016/S0090-4295(00)00502-1
Mani Menon, Alok Shrivastava, Mahendra Bhandari, Ramgopal Satyanarayana, Siddharth Siva, Piyush K. Agarwal, Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy: Technical Modifications in 2009 European Urology. ,vol. 56, pp. 89- 96 ,(2009) , 10.1016/J.EURURO.2009.04.032
BERTRAND GUILLONNEAU, GUY VALLANCIEN, LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: THE MONTSOURIS TECHNIQUE The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 163, pp. 1643- 1649 ,(2000) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67512-X
PATRICK CRAIG WALSH, ANATOMIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: EVOLUTION OF THE SURGICAL TECHNIQUE The Journal of Urology. ,vol. 160, pp. 2418- 2424 ,(1998) , 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62202-X
Christopher L. Coogan, J. Samuel Little, Richard Bihrle, Richard S. Foster, Urethral catheter removal prior to hospital discharge following radical prostatectomy Urology. ,vol. 49, pp. 400- 403 ,(1997) , 10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00491-8