Long-term impact of posterior reconstruction urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted prostatectomy A secondary analysis of a randomized cohort.

Introduction: We aimed to assess early and late continence rates post-robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), comparing posterior reconstruction (PR) urethrovesical anastomosis (UVA) to conventional urethrovesical anastomosis (C-UVA).

Methods: Consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer undergoing RARP underwent simple randomization to PR-UVA or C-UVA. Return to continence outcomes were assessed using a validated questionnaire (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC] Short Form-26) at baseline, two-, three-, four-, six-, eight-, and 12-month followups. Five-year outcomes were assessed by frequency of undergoing continence-improving procedures.

Results: A total of 163 patients were randomized 1:1 to PR-UVA or C-UVA from April 2014 to July 2015, and 140 patients completed followup. There were no significant clinical or functional differences between groups preoperatively. Using a continence definition of 0-1 pads/day, the continence rates for PR-UVA vs. C-UVA were 39% vs. 38% at two months, respectively (p=1.0), and 93% vs. 86%, respectively, at 12 months (p=0.3). Frequency of urine leak, quantity of pad use, subjective urinary control, and overall bother improved significantly in all patients during the 12-month study period (p<0.001); however, no difference was demonstrated between groups. Five-year results showed no statistically significant difference in the number of patients undergoing a continence-improving procedure (hazard ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 0.40-3.65, p=0.7).

Conclusions: PR-UVA failed to show a benefit in short-term return to urinary continence or need for an incontinence-improving procedure five years post-RARP.