Comparative Outcomes and Management of Vesicourethral Anastomotic Stenosis After Contemporary Standard and Pelvic-Fascia—Sparing Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Techniques
Open Access
- 1 June 2026
- journal article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in JU Open Plus
- Vol. 4 (6) , e00060
Abstract
Purpose: Vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) occurs after 1 to 3% of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies (RARPs). Pelvic fascia–sparing techniques preserve more native anatomy and may reduce stenoses, but evidence is lacking. The aim of this study was to compare stenosis incidence, management, and outcomes after standard vs pelvic fascia–sparing RARP. Materials and Methods: We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective study of 910 standard, 409 Retzius-sparing, and 272 hood RARP during February 2012-September 2025. Standard and hood techniques used 18Fr urethral catheters, and the Retzius-sparing technique used 18Fr suprapubic catheters. The primary end point was cystoscopically confirmed VUAS requiring intervention within 12 months. Urinary continence was assessed using the validated Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP). Multivariable logistic regression assessed factors associated with VUAS. Results: There were 19 VUASs overall, with an incidence of 1.6%, 1.5%, and 0% after standard, hood, and Retzius-sparing techniques, respectively. In 88.2%, VUAS resolved with a single endoscopic incision or dilation followed by 6 months of intermittent self-catheterization, without worsening urinary continence ( P = .317). In adjusted analyses, Retzius-sparing vs standard RARP was associated with lower odds of VUAS (odds ratio [OR] 0.051; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.003 to 0.870; P = .040). Diabetes was associated with almost three-fold higher odds of VUAS (OR 2.974; 95% CI 1.146-7.721; P = .025). Increasing surgeon experience was associated with fewer VUASs (OR 0.998; 95% CI 0.995-1.000; P = .046). Conclusions: There were no VUAS after Retzius-sparing RARP, and Retzius-sparing vs standard approach was associated with lower odds of stenosis. Endoscopic management with structured self-catheterization achieved high success without worsening incontinence. Prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.Keywords
This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit:
- Contemporary Open and Robotic Radical Prostatectomy Practice Patterns Among Urologists in the United StatesJournal of Urology, 2012
- Technical Refinement and Learning Curve for Attenuating Neurapraxia During Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy to Improve Sexual FunctionEuropean Urology, 2012
- Risk Factors and Quality of Life for Post-prostatectomy Vesicourethral Anastomotic StenosesUrology, 2012
- Stepwise Approach for Nerve Sparing Without Countertraction During Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Technique and OutcomesEuropean Urology, 2011
- The Learning Curve for Surgical Margins After Open Radical Prostatectomy: Implications for Margin Status as an Oncological End PointJournal of Urology, 2010
- Anatomic Bladder Neck Preservation During Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Description of Technique and OutcomesEuropean Urology, 2009
- Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical ProstatectomyJAMA, 2009
- Weakness of Anastomotic Site in Diabetic Rats Is Caused by Changes in the Integrity of Newly Formed CollagenDigestive Surgery, 2004
- Risk factors for vesicourethral anastomotic stricture after radical prostatectomyUrology, 2000
- Diabetes impairs the development of early strength, but not the accumulation of collagen, during intestinal anastomotic healing in the ratBritish Journal of Surgery, 1994