Technique for Ureteral Stent Placement During Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Safety Measure During Vesicourethral Anastomosis When Ureteral Orifices Are Too Close for Comfort

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 827-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark H. Katz ◽  
Michael K. Eng ◽  
Tom Deklaj ◽  
Kevin C. Zorn
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Stent Placement ◽  
Ureteral Stent ◽  
Safety Measure ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Vesicourethral Anastomosis

Is Ureteral Stent Placement by the Transurethral Approach During Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy an Effective Option to Preoperative Technique?

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (8) ◽  
pp. 896-898 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Molinari ◽  
Giovanni Simonelli ◽  
Bernardino De Concilio ◽  
Antonio Benito Porcaro ◽  
Dario Del Biondo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Stent Placement ◽  
Ureteral Stent ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Effective Option

scholarly journals Long-term urinary functional outcome of vesicourethral anastomosis with bidirectional poliglecaprone (Monocryl®) vs. barbed polyglyconate suture (V-LocTM 180) in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emad Rajih ◽  
Malek Meskawi ◽  
Abdullah M. Alenizi ◽  
Kevin C. Zorn ◽  
Mansour Alnazari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Single Layer ◽  
Barbed Suture ◽  
Urinary Continence ◽  
First Year ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Monofilament Suture ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Vesicourethral Anastomosis ◽  
One Year

Introduction: We aimed to evaluate urinary continence recovery following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using monofilament poliglecaprone (Monocryl®) suture vs. barbed suture (V-LocTM 180) during vesicourethral anastomosis. Methods: In this prospective, observational cohort, data were collected on 322 consecutive patients. All patients underwent continuous, bidirectional, single-layer running anastomosis with either 3.0-monofilament suture (n=141) or 3.0 barbed suture (n=181). The primary outcome was continence recovery defined as time to 0 pad at one, three, six, 12, and 24 months following surgery. Results: Continence rates were significantly better with monofilament VUA at all followup time points up to one year. Median time to continence was one month vs. five months in the monofilament group vs. barbed group, respectively (p<0.001). Continence rates in monofilament suture vs. barbed group at one, three, six, 12, and 24 months were 56% vs. 26% (p<0.001), 73% vs. 36.4% (p<0.001), 84.4% vs. 60.2% (p<0.001), 90.8% vs. 71.9% (p<0.001), and 93.5% vs.87.1% (p=0.1), respectively. Anastomosis time was shorter in the barbed group, with a median of 23 vs. 30 utes (p<0.001). Patients anastomosed with Monocryl suture had smaller prostate weight (median 42.5 g vs. 50 g; p<0.001) and harbored less advanced disease (T2a‒c 76.6 vs. 74%; p=0.01) relative to patients treated with V-Loc 180 suture. However, in a multivariate Cox logistic regression analyses, independent predictors of continence recovery were suture type (hazard ratio [HR] 53; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41‒0.68; p=0.02] and prostate size (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.98‒0.99; p<0.001). Conclusions: Barbed VUA contributed to delayed continence recovery compared to monofilament poliglecaprone suture during the first year post-RARP. However, no statistically significant difference was recorded at two years post-RARP. These results warrant special attention, especially with the widespread use of barbed suture in recent years.

Effect of a novel technique of posterior reconstruction of pubourethralis on ‘early’ return of continence after robot assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP): A comparative study

2021 ◽  
pp. 039156032110070
Author(s):  
Malik Abdul Rouf ◽  
Venkatesh Kumar ◽  
Anshuman Agarwal ◽  
Mahender Sharma ◽  
Suresh Kumar Rawat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Novel Technique ◽  
Early Return ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Vesicourethral Anastomosis ◽  
Posterior Reconstruction ◽  
And Control

Objective: To study the effect of a novel technique of posterior reconstruction of pubourethralis on early return of continence after robot assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Materials and methods: The study included 206 patients of organ confined prostate cancer managed at our centre between March 2014 and December 2018.The patients were randomly distributed into two comparable groups with respect to age, height, weight and BMI, with 100 patients in control and 106 patients in study group. After standard excision of the specimen, the posterior reconstruction in the form of Rocco stitch was done in control group while in addition to Rocco stitch pubourethralis was approximated posteriorly in midline at the proposed site of vesicourethral anastomosis in study group. Continence was defined as the need to use 0–1 pad in 24 h. The data was collected on day 0, 3, 7, 15, 30, 90 and 180 after removal of catheter. Results: At day zero, 3,7, 15, 30, 90 and 180 days after catheter removal continence rates (⩽1 pad usage per day) were observed to be 18.8% versus 0%, 22.6% versus 0%, 50.9% versus 5%, 72.6% versus 20%, 84.9 versus 32%, 97.1% versus 83%, and 97.1% versus 91% in the study and control group respectively. Conclusion: Despite small number of patients in this study the results with respect to early return of continence are encouraging in the reconstruction group and there by in favour of this technique .Furthermore the technique is easily reproducible and may be seen as one more additional step to be applied in order to enhance the recovery of continence after RARP. However it is necessary to further validate the efficacy of this procedure through multicenteric controlled trials.

Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using the Novel Urethral Fixation Technique Versus Standard Vesicourethral Anastomosis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincenzo Ficarra ◽  
Marta Rossanese ◽  
Alessandro Crestani ◽  
Giuseppe Alario ◽  
Giuseppe Mucciardi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Fixation Technique ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Vesicourethral Anastomosis
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document