Open AccessBladder neck sparing in radical prostatectomy
Author(s) -
Michal Smolski,
Rachel Esler,
Rafał Turo,
Gerald N. Collins,
Neil Oakley,
Richard Brough
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
indian journal of urology/indian journal of urology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.333
H-Index - 30
eISSN - 1998-3824
pISSN - 0970-1591
DOI - 10.4103/0970-1591.120118
Subject(s) - medicine , neck of urinary bladder , prostatectomy , urinary continence , surgery , retrospective cohort study , urology , anastomosis , urinary bladder , prostate , cancer
The role of a bladder neck sparing (BNS) technique in radical prostatectomy (RP) remains controversial. The potential advantages of improved functional recovery must be weighed against oncological outcomes. We performed a literature review to evaluate the current knowledge regarding oncological and functional outcomes of BNS and bladder neck reconstruction (BNr) in RP. A systematic literature review using on-line medical databases was performed. A total of 33 papers were identified evaluating the use of BNS in open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted RP. The majority were retrospective case series, with only one prospective, randomised, blinded study identified. The majority of papers reported no significant difference in oncological outcomes using a BNS or BNr technique, regardless of the surgical technique employed. Quoted positive surgical margin rates ranged from 6% to 32%. Early urinary continence (UC) rates were ranged from 36% to 100% at 1 month, with long-term UC rate reported at 84-100% at 12 months if the bladder neck (BN) was spared. BNS has been shown to improve early return of UC and long-term UC without compromising oncological outcomes. Anastomotic stricture rate is also lower when using a BNS technique.