Intussusception of bladder neck improves early continence after radical prostatectomy: Results of a prospective trial

To evaluate the impact of intussusception of the bladder neck on post-radical prostatectomy incontinence. A total of 272 men with organ-confined prostate cancer who had undergone radical retropubic prostatectomy were studied. Of the 272 men, 139 underwent bladder neck intussusception and 133 did not...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 2005-03, Vol.65 (3), p.524-527
Hauptverfasser: Wille, S., Varga, Z., von Knobloch, R., Hofmann, R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To evaluate the impact of intussusception of the bladder neck on post-radical prostatectomy incontinence. A total of 272 men with organ-confined prostate cancer who had undergone radical retropubic prostatectomy were studied. Of the 272 men, 139 underwent bladder neck intussusception and 133 did not. Patients completed validated questionnaires IIQ-7 and a symptom inventory. Continence was defined as the use of no or only one pad daily. Of the 272 men, 100%, 98.5%, and 96% answered the questionnaire and urinary symptom inventory at baseline and 3 and 12 months postoperatively, respectively. According to the protective pad requirement, 100%, 60%, and 86% of patients without intussusception and 100%, 77%, and 83% of the patients with intussusception were continent at baseline and 3 and 12 months postoperatively, respectively. Univariate logistic regression analysis revealed a statistically significant impact of intussusception on postprostatectomy incontinence at 3 months ( P = 0.009), although continence at 12 months did not differ significantly ( P = 0.5). Intussusception of the bladder neck had a significant effect on regaining continence at 3 months, although continence at 12 months was not affected.
ISSN:0090-4295
1527-9995
DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2004.09.066