FORMATION OF VESICOURETHRAL ANASTOMOSIS DURING ENDOVIDEOSURGICAL EXTRAPERITONEAL RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: СOMPARATIVE STUDY OF THREE DIFFERENT PROCEDURES
https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2014-10-2-53-57
Abstract
Extraperitoneoscopic (endovideosurgical extraperitoneal) radical prostatectomy (ERPE) is one of the current surgical treatment procedures in patients with localized prostate cancer. Failure of vesicourethral anastomosis (VUA) and the development of its stricture are common surgi-cal complications. This investigation compares the efficiency and safety of different procedures to form VUA during ERPE: an interrupted suture (n = 24), a MVAC suture (n = 23), and a MVAC suture using self-locking suture material (n = 24). The performed comparative analysis of different procedures for forming VUA during ERPE may conclude that there are a number of advantages of the MVAC suture ap-plying the self-locking suture material. These advantages include less time taken to form VUA with the low frequency of complications, such as leakages occurring during control cystography or the development of delayed VUA strictures.
About the Authors
S. V. Popov
Saint Luke’s Clinical Hospital, Saint Petersburg; Saint Petersburg City Center for Endoscopic Urology and New Technologies;medical faculti, Saint Petersburg State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
A. I. Gorelov
medical faculti, Saint Petersburg State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
M. B. Borisenkov
medical faculti, Saint Petersburg State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
I. N. Orlov
Saint Luke’s Clinical Hospital, Saint Petersburg; Saint Petersburg City Center for Endoscopic Urology and New Technologies
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
P. V. Vyazovtsev
Saint Luke’s Clinical Hospital, Saint Petersburg; Saint Petersburg City Center for Endoscopic Urology and New Technologies
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2008 году (заболеваемость и смертность). Под. ред. В.И. Чиссова, В.В. Старинского, Г.В. Петровой. М.: ФГУ «МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена Росмедтехно-логий», 2010.
2. Аполихин О.И., Чернышев И.В., Абдуллин И.И. Стандартизированный под-ход к внедрению новых хирургических вме-шательств на примере экстраперитонео-скопической радикальной простатэктомии. Онкоурология 2012;(2):82–6.
3. Александров И.В., Алексеев Б.Я., Быстров С.В. и др. Лапароскопическая хи-рургия в онкоурологии. Под ред. В.Б. Мат-веева, Б.Я. Алексеева. М.: АБВ-пресс, 2007.
4. Djavan B., Eckersberger E., Finkelstein J. et al. Oncologic, functional and cost analysis of open, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Suppl 2010;9(3):371–8.
5. Penson D.F. Socioeconomic factors, urological epidemiology and practice patterns. J Urol 2011;186(1): 212–3.
6. Радикальная простатэктомия. Под ред. Р. Кирби, Ф. Монторси, П. Гонтеро и др.; пер. с англ. под ред. Д.Ю. Пушкаря. М.: ГЭОТАР-Медиа, 2011.
7. Matsuyama H., Sakano S., Hara T. et al. Does running suture of vesico-urethral anastomosis improve recovery of continence in patients with retropubic radical prostatectomy? A randomized study compared with conventional interrupted suture. Eur Urol Suppl 2007;11, iss. 1, e1-e1124, February 2012.
8. Van Velthoven R., Abbou C.C., Rassweiler J. et al. Multicentric survey about 5158 vesico-urethral anastomoses after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Eur Urol Suppl 2007; 6(2):127.
9. Kostakopoulos A., Argiropoulos V., Protogerou V. et al. Vesicourethral anastomotic strictures after radical retropubic prostatectomy: the experience of a single institution. Urol Int 2004;72(1):17–20.
10. Переверзев О.С., Коган М.И. Рак про-статы: Монография. Харьков, 2004. 231 с.
11. Hu J.C., Gold K.F., Pashos C.L. et al. Role of surgeon volume in radical prostatectomy outcomes. J Clin Oncol 2003;21;401.
Review
For citations:
Popov S.V., Gorelov A.I., Borisenkov M.B., Orlov I.N., Vyazovtsev P.V. FORMATION OF VESICOURETHRAL ANASTOMOSIS DURING ENDOVIDEOSURGICAL EXTRAPERITONEAL RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: СOMPARATIVE STUDY OF THREE DIFFERENT PROCEDURES. Cancer Urology. 2014;10(2):53-57. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2014-10-2-53-57
Views:
2041
Email this article 