Материалы доступны только для специалистов сферы здравоохранения. Авторизуйтесь или зарегистрируйтесь.
Влияние вариантов реконструкции уретровезикального анастомоза при выполнении радикальной простатэктомии на восстановление функции удержания мочи
________________________________________________
Golubtsova E.N., Tomilov A.A., Veliev E.I. Influence of urethrovesical anastomosis reconstruction variants use in radical prostatectomy on urinary continence recovery. Consilium Medicum. 2018; 20 (7): 26–29. DOI: 10.26442/2075-1753_2018.7.26-29
Материалы доступны только для специалистов сферы здравоохранения. Авторизуйтесь или зарегистрируйтесь.
Ключевые слова: простатэктомия, уретровезикальный анастомоз, реконструкция.
________________________________________________
Key words: prostatectomy, urethrovesical anastomosis, reconstruction.
3. Sukumar S, Rogers CG, Trinh QD et al. Oncological outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: long-term follow-up in 4803 patients. BJU Int 2014; 114: 824–31.
4. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 405–17.
5. Noguchi M, Kakuma Т, Suekane S еt al. A randomized clinical trial of suspension technique for improving early recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int 2008; 102: 958–63.
6. Patel VR, Coelho RF, Palmer KJ et al. Periurethral suspension stitch during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the technique and continence outcomes. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 472–8.
7. Bahler CD, Sundaram CP, Kella N et al. A parallel randomized clinical trial examining the return of urinary continence after robotassisted radical prostatectomy with or without a small intestinal submucosa bladder neck sling. J Urol 2016; 196: 179–84.
8. Cestari A, Ferrari M, Ghezzi M et al. Retropubic intracorporeal placement of a suburethral autologous sling during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to improve early urinary continence recovery: preliminary data. J Endourol 2015; 29: 1379–85.
9. Walz J, Burnett AL, Costello AJ et al. A critical analysis of the current knowledge of surgical anatomy related to optimization of cancer control and preservation of continence and erection in candidates for radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 179–92.
10. Costello AJ, Dowdle BW, Namdarian B et al. Immunohistochemical study of the cavernous nerves in the periprostatic region. Bju Int 2010; 107, 1210–5.
11. Tewari AK, Ali A, Ghareeb G et al. Improving time to continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy:augmentation of the total anatomic reconstruction technique by adding dynamic detrusor cuff trigonoplasty and suprapubic tube placement. J Endourol 2012; 26: 1546–52.
12. Lim SK, Kim KH, Shin TY et al. Current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: how does it compare with other surgical approaches? Int J Urol 2013; 20: 271–84.
13. Galfano A, Trapani D, Sozzi F et al. Beyond the learning curve of the retzius-sparing approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional results of the first 200 patients with ≥1 year of follow-up. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 974–80.
14. Lim SK, Kim KH, Shin TY et al. Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: combining the best of retropubic and perineal approaches. BJU Int 2014; 114 (2): 236–44.
15. Rocco B, Cozzi G, Spinelli MG et al. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 779–90.
16. Ghani KR, Menon M. Posterior reconstruction: weighing the evidence. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 791–3.
17. Jeong W, Lee JK, Oh JJ et al. Effects of New 1-Step Posterior Reconstruction Method on Recovery of Continence after Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy: Results of a Prospective, Single-Blind, Parallel Group, Randomized, Controlled Trial Chang. J Urol 2015; 193 (3): 935–42.
18. Student VJr, Vidlar A, Grepl M et al. Advanced Reconstruction of Vesicourethral Support (ARVUS) during Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: One-year Functional Outcomes in a Two-group Randomised Controlled Trial. Eur Urol 2017; 71 (5): 822–30.
19. Gratzke C, Dovey Z, Novara G et al. Early Catheter Removal after Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Surgical Technique and Outcomes for the Aalst Technique (ECaRemA Study). Eur Urol 2016; 69 (5): 917–23.
20. Porpiglia F, Bertolo R, Manfredi M et al. Total Anatomical Reconstruction During Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Implications on Early Recovery of Urinary Continence. Eur Urol 2016; 69 (3): 485–95.
________________________________________________
1. Abdollah F, Sood A, Sammon JD et al. Long-term cancer control outcomes in patients with clinically high-risk prostate cancer treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: results from a multi-institutional study of 1100 patients. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 497–505.
2. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Trends in management for patients with localized prostate cancer, 1990–2013. JAMA 2015; 314: 80–2.
3. Sukumar S, Rogers CG, Trinh QD et al. Oncological outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: long-term follow-up in 4803 patients. BJU Int 2014; 114: 824–31.
4. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 405–17.
5. Noguchi M, Kakuma Т, Suekane S еt al. A randomized clinical trial of suspension technique for improving early recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int 2008; 102: 958–63.
6. Patel VR, Coelho RF, Palmer KJ et al. Periurethral suspension stitch during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the technique and continence outcomes. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 472–8.
7. Bahler CD, Sundaram CP, Kella N et al. A parallel randomized clinical trial examining the return of urinary continence after robotassisted radical prostatectomy with or without a small intestinal submucosa bladder neck sling. J Urol 2016; 196: 179–84.
8. Cestari A, Ferrari M, Ghezzi M et al. Retropubic intracorporeal placement of a suburethral autologous sling during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to improve early urinary continence recovery: preliminary data. J Endourol 2015; 29: 1379–85.
9. Walz J, Burnett AL, Costello AJ et al. A critical analysis of the current knowledge of surgical anatomy related to optimization of cancer control and preservation of continence and erection in candidates for radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 179–92.
10. Costello AJ, Dowdle BW, Namdarian B et al. Immunohistochemical study of the cavernous nerves in the periprostatic region. Bju Int 2010; 107, 1210–5.
11. Tewari AK, Ali A, Ghareeb G et al. Improving time to continence after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy:augmentation of the total anatomic reconstruction technique by adding dynamic detrusor cuff trigonoplasty and suprapubic tube placement. J Endourol 2012; 26: 1546–52.
12. Lim SK, Kim KH, Shin TY et al. Current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: how does it compare with other surgical approaches? Int J Urol 2013; 20: 271–84.
13. Galfano A, Trapani D, Sozzi F et al. Beyond the learning curve of the retzius-sparing approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional results of the first 200 patients with ≥1 year of follow-up. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 974–80.
14. Lim SK, Kim KH, Shin TY et al. Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: combining the best of retropubic and perineal approaches. BJU Int 2014; 114 (2): 236–44.
15. Rocco B, Cozzi G, Spinelli MG et al. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 779–90.
16. Ghani KR, Menon M. Posterior reconstruction: weighing the evidence. Eur Urol 2012; 62: 791–3.
17. Jeong W, Lee JK, Oh JJ et al. Effects of New 1-Step Posterior Reconstruction Method on Recovery of Continence after Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy: Results of a Prospective, Single-Blind, Parallel Group, Randomized, Controlled Trial Chang. J Urol 2015; 193 (3): 935–42.
18. Student VJr, Vidlar A, Grepl M et al. Advanced Reconstruction of Vesicourethral Support (ARVUS) during Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: One-year Functional Outcomes in a Two-group Randomised Controlled Trial. Eur Urol 2017; 71 (5): 822–30.
19. Gratzke C, Dovey Z, Novara G et al. Early Catheter Removal after Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Surgical Technique and Outcomes for the Aalst Technique (ECaRemA Study). Eur Urol 2016; 69 (5): 917–23.
20. Porpiglia F, Bertolo R, Manfredi M et al. Total Anatomical Reconstruction During Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Implications on Early Recovery of Urinary Continence. Eur Urol 2016; 69 (3): 485–95.
1 ФГБОУ ДПО «Российская медицинская академия непрерывного профессионального образования» Минздрава России. 125993, Россия, Москва, ул. Баррикадная, д. 2/1;
*engolubtsova@yandex.ru
________________________________________________
1 Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. 125993, Russian Federation, Moscow, ul. Barrikadnaia, d. 2/1;
2 S.P.Botkin City Сlinical Hospital of the Department of Health of Moscow. 125284, Russian Federation, Moscow, 2-i Botkinskii pr-d, d. 5
*engolubtsova@yandex.ru