Montanari E, Del Nero A, Bernardini P, Trinchieri A, Zanetti G, Rocco B
Istituto di Urologia dell'Università degli Studi di Milano, IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore di Milano, Milano.
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2001 Sep;73(3):121-6.
Beginning in the 1980s, a series of anatomical discoveries were introduced to modify the classic retropubic radical prostatectomy proposed by Millin in 1942 in an effort to reduce intra and postoperative complications such as intraoperative bleeding and postoperative erectile dysfunction and incontinence. Urinary incontinence post retropubic "anatomical" radical prostatectomy remains a distressing problem for the patient and the physician rating from 6 to 20% even in the hands of experienced surgeons from high volume Academic Centers. The reason for the discrepancy in results is unclear and should be searched in surgical experience of the surgeon, volume of surgical activity of the Center, and selection of the patients undergoing the radical retropubic procedure. In the Literature we identified methodological factors which can bias the data on post radical retropubic prostatectomy such as 1) Consensus is lacking on definition of continence and/or incontinence following radical retropubic prostatectomy 2) Different surgical techniques are compared: sphincter damaging, versus repairing, versus preserving; bladder neck sparing versus non sparing; nerve sparing versus non sparing 3) Patients with preoperative urinary incontinence are included in the series and the preoperative continence status is not known. 4) Different timing in registration of incontinence. 5) Different methods in data collection. This latter seems to be the most important reason for discrepancy in the collection of the data. Self administered questionnaires oriented to evaluate incontinence analyzed by a third party seem to be the most powerful and objective tool for post prostatectomy incontinence rating. Post prostatectomy incontinence may be attributed to sphincter dysfunction as a result of surgical injury during prostatic surgery and/or to bladder dysfunction including detrusor instability and decreased compliance resulting in stress or urge or mixed stress/urge postoperative incontinence. In the Literature bladder dysfunction is considered to be responsible or jointly responsible for post RRP incontinence in a rate as high as 93%. More recently, a major role is considered to be played in post RRP incontinence pathophysiology by intrinsic sphincter insufficiency. Rarely bladder dysfunction is an isolated cause of incontinence. Moreover the symptom of stress incontinence accurately predicts the finding of intrinsic sphincter deficiency. The apical dissection and the preservation of the intrinsic sphincter remain the most complex parts of RRP and the keys to the maintenance of postoperative urinary continence.
从20世纪80年代开始,一系列解剖学发现被引入,以改进1942年米林提出的经典耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术,旨在减少术中出血、术后勃起功能障碍和尿失禁等术中及术后并发症。耻骨后“解剖学”根治性前列腺切除术后的尿失禁,即使在来自大型学术中心的经验丰富的外科医生手中,对患者和医生来说仍然是一个令人苦恼的问题,发生率在6%至20%之间。结果存在差异的原因尚不清楚,应该从外科医生的手术经验、中心的手术量以及接受耻骨后根治性手术的患者选择等方面去寻找。在文献中,我们确定了一些可能使耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术后数据产生偏差的方法学因素,例如:1)耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术后尿失禁和/或控尿的定义缺乏共识;2)比较了不同的手术技术:括约肌损伤、修复与保留;保留膀胱颈与不保留;保留神经与不保留;3)系列研究纳入了术前有尿失禁的患者,且术前控尿状态未知;4)尿失禁登记的时间不同;5)数据收集方法不同。后者似乎是数据收集存在差异的最重要原因。由第三方分析的用于评估尿失禁的自我管理问卷,似乎是前列腺切除术后尿失禁评级最有力和客观的工具。前列腺切除术后尿失禁可能归因于前列腺手术期间手术损伤导致的括约肌功能障碍,和/或膀胱功能障碍,包括逼尿肌不稳定和顺应性降低,导致压力性、急迫性或混合性压力/急迫性术后尿失禁。在文献中,膀胱功能障碍被认为是耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术后尿失禁的原因或共同原因,发生率高达93%。最近,内在括约肌功能不全在耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术后尿失禁的病理生理学中被认为起主要作用。膀胱功能障碍很少是尿失禁的孤立原因。此外,压力性尿失禁症状准确预测了内在括约肌缺陷的发现。尖部解剖和内在括约肌的保留仍然是耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术最复杂的部分,也是维持术后尿失禁的关键。