Factors Associated with Recovery of Urinary Continence: A Multicenter Comparison of Pelvic Fascia-sparing and Standard Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

IF 5.6 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Gal Wald, Evan Suzman, James B Mason, Sukhjeevan Nijhar, Oakley Strasser, May Ting, Catherine Pothier, Vanessa Dudley, Judy Zhong, Keith J Kowalczyk, Jim C Hu
{"title":"Factors Associated with Recovery of Urinary Continence: A Multicenter Comparison of Pelvic Fascia-sparing and Standard Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy.","authors":"Gal Wald, Evan Suzman, James B Mason, Sukhjeevan Nijhar, Oakley Strasser, May Ting, Catherine Pothier, Vanessa Dudley, Judy Zhong, Keith J Kowalczyk, Jim C Hu","doi":"10.1016/j.euf.2025.06.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Pelvic fascia-sparing (PFS) approaches during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) may lead to faster and better recovery of urinary continence. However, direct comparisons are limited. We compared continence recovery across standard, anterior PFS (APFS), and posterior PFS (PPFS) RARP approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods and surgical procedure: </strong>We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of 1155 RARP (593 standard, 332 PPFS, and 230 APFS) procedures performed between February 2012 and May 2024. Our primary outcome was urinary continence defined as the use of zero to one pad per day, identified from the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice. Multivariable models evaluated the factors affecting early and long-term urinary continence.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>PPFS and APFS versus the standard approach were associated with improved urinary continence at 3 mo (90%, 83%, and 64%, respectively; p < 0.001), 12 mo (96%, 89%, and 84%, respectively; p < 0.001), and 20 mo (97%, 99%, and 90%, respectively; p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, PPFS (odds ratio [OR] 3.71; confidence interval [CI] 2.27-6.07; p < 0.001) and APFS (OR 3.54; CI 1.97-6.37; p < 0.001) were associated with improved 3-mo continence compared with standard RARP. Similar results were observed for both PFS approaches at 12 mo. Only PPFS was associated with better long-term continence (20 mo: OR 3.00; CI 1.74-5.17; p < 0.001). However, PPFS had the highest positive surgical margins (standard: 29.5%; PPFS: 37.4%; APFS: 30.0%; p = 0.04). The sequential adoption of techniques from standard RARP to PPFS and then to APFS leads to disparate follow-up and sample sizes as a limitation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PPFS and APFS were associated with better urinary continence recovery, although PPFS was found to have more positive surgical margins. Randomized trials are needed to validate our findings.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>We compared the recovery rate of urinary continence after three surgical approaches with varying degrees of pelvic fascia sparing (PFS). Our findings suggest that PFS improves short- and long-term urinary continence compared with the standard approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":12160,"journal":{"name":"European urology focus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2025.06.005","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective: Pelvic fascia-sparing (PFS) approaches during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) may lead to faster and better recovery of urinary continence. However, direct comparisons are limited. We compared continence recovery across standard, anterior PFS (APFS), and posterior PFS (PPFS) RARP approaches.

Methods and surgical procedure: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of 1155 RARP (593 standard, 332 PPFS, and 230 APFS) procedures performed between February 2012 and May 2024. Our primary outcome was urinary continence defined as the use of zero to one pad per day, identified from the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice. Multivariable models evaluated the factors affecting early and long-term urinary continence.

Key findings and limitations: PPFS and APFS versus the standard approach were associated with improved urinary continence at 3 mo (90%, 83%, and 64%, respectively; p < 0.001), 12 mo (96%, 89%, and 84%, respectively; p < 0.001), and 20 mo (97%, 99%, and 90%, respectively; p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, PPFS (odds ratio [OR] 3.71; confidence interval [CI] 2.27-6.07; p < 0.001) and APFS (OR 3.54; CI 1.97-6.37; p < 0.001) were associated with improved 3-mo continence compared with standard RARP. Similar results were observed for both PFS approaches at 12 mo. Only PPFS was associated with better long-term continence (20 mo: OR 3.00; CI 1.74-5.17; p < 0.001). However, PPFS had the highest positive surgical margins (standard: 29.5%; PPFS: 37.4%; APFS: 30.0%; p = 0.04). The sequential adoption of techniques from standard RARP to PPFS and then to APFS leads to disparate follow-up and sample sizes as a limitation.

Conclusions: PPFS and APFS were associated with better urinary continence recovery, although PPFS was found to have more positive surgical margins. Randomized trials are needed to validate our findings.

Patient summary: We compared the recovery rate of urinary continence after three surgical approaches with varying degrees of pelvic fascia sparing (PFS). Our findings suggest that PFS improves short- and long-term urinary continence compared with the standard approach.

与尿失禁恢复相关的因素:骨盆筋膜保留和标准机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的多中心比较。
背景与目的:机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)中盆腔筋膜保留(PFS)入路可以更快更好地恢复尿失禁。然而,直接比较是有限的。我们比较了标准、前路PFS (APFS)和后路PFS (PPFS) RARP入路的失禁恢复情况。方法和手术方法:我们对2012年2月至2024年5月期间进行的1155例RARP(593例标准手术,332例PPFS手术和230例APFS手术)进行了多中心回顾性研究。我们的主要终点是尿失禁,定义为每天使用0到1个尿垫,从前列腺癌扩展指数复合临床实践中确定。多变量模型评估影响早期和长期尿失禁的因素。主要发现和局限性:与标准入路相比,PPFS和APFS与3个月时尿失禁改善相关(分别为90%、83%和64%;结论:PPFS和APFS与更好的尿失禁恢复相关,尽管PPFS有更多的阳性手术切缘。需要随机试验来验证我们的发现。患者总结:我们比较了三种不同程度骨盆筋膜保留(PFS)手术入路后尿失禁的治愈率。我们的研究结果表明,与标准方法相比,PFS可改善短期和长期尿失禁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European urology focus
European urology focus Medicine-Urology
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
274
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: European Urology Focus is a new sister journal to European Urology and an official publication of the European Association of Urology (EAU). EU Focus will publish original articles, opinion piece editorials and topical reviews on a wide range of urological issues such as oncology, functional urology, reconstructive urology, laparoscopy, robotic surgery, endourology, female urology, andrology, paediatric urology and sexual medicine. The editorial team welcome basic and translational research articles in the field of urological diseases. Authors may be solicited by the Editor directly. All submitted manuscripts will be peer-reviewed by a panel of experts before being considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信