Comparison of postoperative urinary continence and incontinence types between conventional and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
- PMID: 37096807
- DOI: 10.1002/nau.25193
Comparison of postoperative urinary continence and incontinence types between conventional and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
Abstract
Aims: This study aimed to investigate the postoperative urinary continence rate and incontinence types compared over time between conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (C-RARP) and Retzius-sparing RARP (RS-RARP).
Methods: All 61 cases were selected from the C-RARP and RS-RARP by propensity score matching, and the pad scale, 24-h pad weight test, and International consultation on incontinence questionnaire-short form (ICIQ-SF) were followed-up over time up to 12 months.
Results: The probability of urinary continence per pad scale evaluation differed according to how it was defined: the continence rate 12 months after C-RARP and RS-RARP were 94% and 95% for 1 pad/day, 85% and 92% for 1 security pad/day, 61% and 85% for no pad use, respectively, which were all significantly better with RS-RARP. The results of the 24-h pad weight test were significantly better with RS-RARP at both 3 and 12 months, with median C-RARP versus RS-RARP values of 5 versus 1 g and 2 versus 0 g, respectively. In terms of types of urinary incontinence, the rates of postoperative stress urinary incontinence (SUI) increased in both procedures but to a lesser extent in RS-RARP. Other types of urinary incontinence, such as urge incontinence and terminal dribbling, did not differ significantly before and after surgery and between the two procedures.
Conclusions: Postoperative urinary continence was better with RS-RARP than with C-RARP per all follow-up parameters until 12 months postoperatively. Postoperative SUI was significantly lower with RS-RARP than with C-RARP, which was considered the main reason for better postoperative urinary continence with RS-RARP.
Keywords: 24-h pad weight test; ICIQ-SF; Retzius-sparing; incontinence type; pad scale; robot-assisted radical prostatectomy; urinary incontinence.
© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Similar articles
-
Retzius-sparing Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Leads to Durable Improvement in Urinary Function and Quality of Life Versus Standard Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Without Compromise on Oncologic Efficacy: Single-surgeon Series and Step-by-step Guide.Eur Urol. 2021 Jun;79(6):839-857. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.05.010. Epub 2020 Jun 11. Eur Urol. 2021. PMID: 32536488
-
Postoperative functional and cancer control evaluation of conventional and Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Comparison of selected cases by propensity score matching.Prostate. 2023 Jun;83(8):773-780. doi: 10.1002/pros.24516. Epub 2023 Mar 6. Prostate. 2023. PMID: 36879364
-
A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial Examining the Impact of the Retzius-sparing Approach on Early Urinary Continence Recovery After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy.Eur Urol. 2017 Nov;72(5):677-685. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.04.029. Epub 2017 May 6. Eur Urol. 2017. PMID: 28483330 Clinical Trial.
-
Outcomes of Retzius-sparing versus conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A KSER update series systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS One. 2022 May 26;17(5):e0268182. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268182. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35617274 Free PMC article.
-
Oncological and functional outcomes of Retzius-sparing vs. standard robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: evidence on randomized-controlled trials studies.J Robot Surg. 2025 Apr 21;19(1):165. doi: 10.1007/s11701-025-02335-z. J Robot Surg. 2025. PMID: 40257521 Review.
Cited by
-
Initial experience of the Versius robotic system in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a study of 58 cases.Cent European J Urol. 2024;77(1):30-36. doi: 10.5173/ceju.2023.241. Epub 2024 Jan 8. Cent European J Urol. 2024. PMID: 38645822 Free PMC article.
-
The impact of prostate volume on Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with retrograde release of the neurovascular bundle.BMC Urol. 2025 Mar 27;25(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s12894-025-01745-3. BMC Urol. 2025. PMID: 40148825 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of transperitoneal anterior, retzius-sparing, extraperitoneal, transvesical and perineal approaches on urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2025 Jun;28(2):328-341. doi: 10.1038/s41391-025-00943-2. Epub 2025 Feb 10. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2025. PMID: 39929994
References
REFERENCES
-
- Whiting PF, Moore THM, Jameson CM, et al. Symptomatic and quality-of-life outcomes after treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2016;118:193-204. doi:10.1111/bju.13499
-
- Porpiglia F, Morra I, Lucci Chiarissi M, et al. Randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2013;63:606-614. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.07.007
-
- Di Pierro GB, Baumeister P, Stucki P, Beatrice J, Danuser H, Mattei A. A prospective trial comparing consecutive series of open retropubic and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a centre with a limited caseload. Eur Urol. 2011;59:1-6. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2010.10.026
-
- Machioka K, Kadono Y, Naito R, et al. Evaluating urinary incontinence before and after radical prostatectomy using the international consultation on incontinence questionnaire-short form. Neurourol Urodyn. 2019;38:726-733. doi:10.1002/nau.23907
-
- Galfano A, Ascione A, Grimaldi S, Petralia G, Strada E, Bocciardi AM. A new anatomic approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a feasibility study for completely intrafascial surgery. Eur Urol. 2010;58:457-461. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2010.06.008
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical