Posterior Muscolofascial Reconstruction Incorporated into Urethrovescical Anastomosis During Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
- 1 December 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Endourology
- Vol. 26 (12) , 1542-1545
Abstract
The rationale of posterior musculofascial plate reconstruction during radical prostatectomy is to shorten the time to reach urinary continence recovery and to reduce the risk of bleeding and anastomosis leakage. We describe our original technique incorporating the posterior muscolofascial reconstruction into urethrovesical anastomosis using robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). For this reconstructive step, we use a 30-cm V-Loc 90 3-0 barbed suture (V-20 tapered needle). Specifically, the free edge of the posterior layer of the Denonvilliers fascia is approximated to the posterior part of the sphincteric apparatus in a running fashion from left to right. The musculature of the urethral wall is incorporated in this first layer of the running suture. This suture is then continued back to the left in a second layer incorporating the anterior layer of the Denonvilliers fascia (or prostatovesical muscle), the bladder neck, and again the urethra, this time also with urethral mucosa. The urethrovesical anastomosis is completed using a second running barbed suture (15-cm V-Loc 90 3-0 barbed suture, V-20 tapered needle). No intraoperative complications were observed during this step of the procedure. Anastomotic leakages were observed only in 2% of cases. Only 12.5% showed urinary incontinence after catheter removal (1–2 pads). At mean follow-up of 9 months, the urinary continence recovery was 95%, and an anastomosis stricture necessitating an endoscopic incision developed in only three (1.5%) patients. Recent systematic reviews of the literature showed only a minimal advantage in favor of posterior musculofascial reconstruction in terms of urinary continence recovery within 1 month after radical prostatectomy. We support the use of this step of RARP because it is simple, reproducible, with a very limited increase in operative time, and with only a slight risk of potential harm to the patient. Moreover, it could improve hemostasis and provide greater support for a delicate anastomosis.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Posterior Reconstruction: Weighing the EvidenceEuropean Urology, 2012
- Posterior Musculofascial Reconstruction After Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review of the LiteratureEuropean Urology, 2012
- Best Practices in Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Recommendations of the Pasadena Consensus PanelEuropean Urology, 2012
- Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Reporting Urinary Continence Recovery After Robot-assisted Radical ProstatectomyEuropean Urology, 2012
- Influence of Modified Posterior Reconstruction of the Rhabdosphincter on Early Recovery of Continence and Anastomotic Leakage Rates after Robot-Assisted Radical ProstatectomyEuropean Urology, 2011
- Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Oncologic and Functional Results of 184 CasesEuropean Urology, 2007
- Posterior Reconstruction of the Rhabdosphincter Allows a Rapid Recovery of Continence after Transperitoneal Videolaparoscopic Radical ProstatectomyEuropean Urology, 2007
- Restoration of Posterior Aspect of Rhabdosphincter Shortens Continence Time After Radical Retropubic ProstatectomyJournal of Urology, 2006
- Anatomical studies of the neurovascular bundle and cavernosal nervesBJU International, 2004
- Early Continence after Radical ProstatectomyJournal of Urology, 1992