[The revival of "uroscopy": an easy way to evaluate the anastomotic region after radical retropubic prostatectomy]

Abstract

Objective: The cystogram after retropubic radical prostatovesiculectomy (RRP) examines the condition of the anastomosis region. There is no clear temporal recommendation for the determination of urine extravasation in cases of early removal of the catheter. This study investigates the macroscopic and microscopic examination of the bladder catheter urine after RRP.

Patients and methods: The catheter urine of 110 patients after RRP was macroscopically and microscopically examined and compared with the results of transrectal ultrasound and cystogram with regard to urine extravasation.

Results: The examination of cloudy or bloody catheter urine indicated an extravasation in 32 of 33 cases (positive predictive value 97%; sensitivity 74%), for clear urine, there was sufficient anastomosis in 66 of 77 cases without any extravasation (negative predictive value 86%; specificity 99%). By performing a microscopic urine analysis unremarkable anastomosis was predicted only in 23 of 67 cases, which leads to a specificity of 34%. This shows that microscopic urine sediment is an inappropriate instrument to evaluate the anastomotic region.

Conclusion: In cases of macroscopic pathological urine findings, further diagnostics are not recommended; in 97% of the cases, extravasation is expected. The macroscopic urine examination sets a trend for other examinations like cystogram or dynamic transrectal ultrasound (dTRUS).