Suppr超能文献

系统评价和荟萃分析报告机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术后尿控恢复的研究。

Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

机构信息

University of Padua, Padua, Italy.

出版信息

Eur Urol. 2012 Sep;62(3):405-17. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.045. Epub 2012 Jun 1.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) was proposed to improve functional outcomes in comparison with retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). In the initial RARP series, 12-mo urinary continence recovery rates ranged from 84% to 97%. However, the few available studies comparing RARP with RRP or LRP published before 2008 did not permit any definitive conclusions about the superiority of any one of these techniques in terms of urinary continence recovery.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this systematic review were (1) to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors for urinary incontinence after RARP, (2) to identify surgical techniques able to improve urinary continence recovery after RARP, and (3) to perform a cumulative analysis of all available studies comparing RARP versus RRP or LRP in terms of the urinary continence recovery rate.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was performed in August 2011 using the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The Medline search included only a free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy across the title and abstract fields of the records. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publication date from January 1, 2008. Searches of the Embase and Web of Science databases used the same free-text protocol, keywords, and search period. Only comparative studies or clinical series including >100 cases reporting urinary continence outcomes were included in this review. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager v.4.2 software designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We analyzed 51 articles reporting urinary continence rates after RARP: 17 case series, 17 studies comparing different techniques in the context of RARP, 9 studies comparing RARP with RRP, and 8 studies comparing RARP with LRP. The 12-mo urinary incontinence rates ranged from 4% to 31%, with a mean value of 16% using a no pad definition. Considering a no pad or safety pad definition, the incidence ranged from 8% to 11%, with a mean value of 9%. Age, body mass index, comorbidity index, lower urinary tract symptoms, and prostate volume were the most relevant preoperative predictors of urinary incontinence after RARP. Only a few comparative studies evaluated the impact of different surgical techniques on urinary continence recovery after RARP. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction with or without anterior reconstruction was associated with a small advantage in urinary continence recovery 1 mo after RARP. Only complete reconstruction was associated with a significant advantage in urinary continence 3 mo after RARP (odds ratio [OR]: 0.76; p=0.04). Cumulative analyses showed a better 12-mo urinary continence recovery after RARP in comparison with RRP (OR: 1.53; p=0.03) or LRP (OR: 2.39; p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of urinary incontinence after RARP is influenced by preoperative patient characteristics, surgeon experience, surgical technique, and methods used to collect and report data. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction seems to offer a slight advantage in terms of 1-mo urinary continence recovery. Update of a previous systematic review of literature shows, for the first time, a statistically significant advantage in favor of RARP in comparison with both RRP and LRP in terms of 12-mo urinary continence recovery.

摘要

背景

机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)被提出以改善与经耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术(RRP)或腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(LRP)相比的功能结果。在最初的 RARP 系列中,12 个月尿控恢复率范围为 84%至 97%。然而,在 2008 年之前发表的少数比较 RARP 与 RRP 或 LRP 的可用研究并不能就任何一种技术在尿控恢复方面的优势得出任何明确的结论。

目的

本系统评价的目的是(1)评估 RARP 后尿失禁的患病率和危险因素,(2)确定能够改善 RARP 后尿控恢复的手术技术,以及(3)对所有比较 RARP 与 RRP 或 LRP 的可用研究进行累积分析,以评估尿控恢复率。

证据获取

2011 年 8 月,使用 Medline、Embase 和 Web of Science 数据库进行文献检索。Medline 检索仅使用标题和摘要字段中记录的“根治性前列腺切除术”一词进行了自由文本方案。使用了以下限制:人类;性别(男性);和 2008 年 1 月 1 日起的出版日期。Embase 和 Web of Science 数据库的搜索使用了相同的自由文本方案、关键词和搜索期。本综述仅包括报告尿控结局的>100 例患者的比较研究或临床系列。使用 Review Manager v.4.2 软件进行累积分析,该软件专门用于编写 Cochrane 评价(Cochrane Collaboration,英国牛津)。

证据综合

我们分析了 51 篇报道 RARP 后尿控率的文章:17 篇病例系列,17 篇研究比较了 RARP 背景下的不同技术,9 篇研究比较了 RARP 与 RRP,8 篇研究比较了 RARP 与 LRP。12 个月尿失禁率为 4%至 31%,使用无垫定义时平均值为 16%。考虑到无垫或安全垫定义,发病率为 8%至 11%,平均值为 9%。年龄、体重指数、合并症指数、下尿路症状和前列腺体积是 RARP 后尿失禁的最重要术前预测因素。只有少数比较研究评估了不同手术技术对 RARP 后尿控恢复的影响。后肌筋膜重建联合或不联合前重建与 RARP 后 1 个月尿控恢复有一定优势。只有完全重建与 3 个月后尿控的显著优势相关(优势比[OR]:0.76;p=0.04)。累积分析显示 RARP 后 12 个月的尿控恢复情况优于 RRP(OR:1.53;p=0.03)或 LRP(OR:2.39;p=0.006)。

结论

RARP 后尿失禁的发生率受术前患者特征、外科医生经验、手术技术以及收集和报告数据的方法影响。后肌筋膜重建在 1 个月时的尿控恢复方面似乎略有优势。对文献的系统评价更新首次显示,在 12 个月的尿控恢复方面,与 RRP 和 LRP 相比,RARP 具有统计学意义上的优势。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验