Comparison of perioperative outcomes between running versus interrupted vesicourethral anastomosis in open radical prostatectomy: A single-surgeon experience.
10.4111/kju.2015.56.6.443
- Author:
Ju Hyun LIM
1
;
Chang Myon PARK
;
Han Kwon KIM
;
Jong Yeon PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Gangneung, Korea. jypark@gnah.co.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Comparative Study
- Keywords:
Prostatectomy;
Prostatic neoplasms;
Surgical anastomosis;
Urine
- MeSH:
Aged;
Anastomosis, Surgical/methods;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Male;
Middle Aged;
Neoplasm Staging;
Prostatectomy/adverse effects/*methods;
Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology/*surgery;
Retrospective Studies;
Suture Techniques;
Treatment Outcome;
Urethra/*surgery;
Urinary Bladder/*surgery;
Urinary Incontinence/etiology/prevention & control;
Urinary Retention/etiology
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2015;56(6):443-448
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To compare perioperative outcomes between running and interrupted vesicourethral anastomosis in open radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 112 patients who underwent open RP for prostate cancer at our institution from 2006 to 2008 by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters were measured. RESULTS: Of 112 consecutive patients, 62 patients underwent vesicourethral anastomosis by use of the running technique, whereas 50 patients underwent anastomosis with the interrupted technique. The groups did not differ significantly in age, body mass index, prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume, or pathologic findings. The intraoperative extravasation rate was significantly lower in the running group (8.1% vs. 24.0%, p=0.01). The mean anastomosis time was 15.1+/-5.3 and 19.3+/-4.6 minutes in the running and interrupted groups, respectively (p=0.04). The rates of postoperative extravasation were similar for both groups (6.4% vs. 10.0%, p=0.12). The duration of catheterization was significantly shorter in the running group (9.0+/-3.0 days vs. 12.9+/-6.4 days, p<0.01). The rate of urinary retention after catheter removal and the rate of bladder neck contracture were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of urinary continence at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after RP was also similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both anastomosis techniques provided similar functional results and a similar rate of postoperative urine extravasation. However, running vesicourethral anastomosis decreased the rate of intraoperative extravasation and time for anastomosis, without increasing the risk of urinary retention or bladder neck contracture.
