Vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis following radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional outcome analysis with a focus on endoscopic approach, surgical sequence, and the impact of radiation therapy

TY - JOUR

T1 - Vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis following radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional outcome analysis with a focus on endoscopic approach, surgical sequence, and the impact of radiation therapy

AU - Pfalzgraf, D

AU - Worst, T

AU - Kranz, J

AU - Steffens, J

AU - Salomon, G

AU - Fisch, M

AU - Reiß, C P

AU - Vetterlein, M W

AU - Rosenbaum, C M

PY - 2021/1

Y1 - 2021/1

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To investigate the predictors of recurrence and of de novo incontinence in patients treated by transurethral incision or resection for vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) after radical prostatectomy.MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients undergoing endoscopic treatment for VUAS between March 2009 and October 2016 were identified in our multi-institutional database. Digital chart reviews were performed and patients contacted for follow-up. Recurrence was defined as any need for further instrumentation or surgery, and de-novo-incontinence as patient-reported outcome.RESULTS: Of 103 patients undergoing endoscopic VUAS treatment, 67 (65%) underwent transurethral resection (TR) and 36 (35%) transurethral incision (TI). TI was performed more frequently as primary treatment compared to TR (58% vs. 37%; p = 0.041). Primary and repeated treatment was performed in 46 (45%) and 57 patients (55%), respectively. Overall, 38 patients (37%) had a history of radiation therapy. There was no difference in time to recurrence for primary vs repeat VUAS treatment, previous vs no radiation, TR compared to TI (all p > 0.08). Regarding treatment success, no difference was found for primary vs. repeat VUAS treatment (50% vs. 37%), previous radiation vs. no radiation (42% vs. 43%), and TR vs. TI (37% vs. 53%; all p ≥ 0.1). Postoperative de novo incontinence was more common after TI vs. TR (31% vs. 12%; p = 0.032), no difference was observed for previous radiation therapy vs. no radiation therapy (18% vs. 18%; p > 0.9) or primary vs. repeat VUAS treatment (22% vs. 16%; p = 0.5).CONCLUSION: VUAS recurrence after endoscopic treatment is not predictable. Endoscopic treatment with TI showed a higher risk for de novo incontinence than TR, and previous irradiation and the number of treatments do not influence incontinence.

AB - OBJECTIVES: To investigate the predictors of recurrence and of de novo incontinence in patients treated by transurethral incision or resection for vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) after radical prostatectomy.MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients undergoing endoscopic treatment for VUAS between March 2009 and October 2016 were identified in our multi-institutional database. Digital chart reviews were performed and patients contacted for follow-up. Recurrence was defined as any need for further instrumentation or surgery, and de-novo-incontinence as patient-reported outcome.RESULTS: Of 103 patients undergoing endoscopic VUAS treatment, 67 (65%) underwent transurethral resection (TR) and 36 (35%) transurethral incision (TI). TI was performed more frequently as primary treatment compared to TR (58% vs. 37%; p = 0.041). Primary and repeated treatment was performed in 46 (45%) and 57 patients (55%), respectively. Overall, 38 patients (37%) had a history of radiation therapy. There was no difference in time to recurrence for primary vs repeat VUAS treatment, previous vs no radiation, TR compared to TI (all p > 0.08). Regarding treatment success, no difference was found for primary vs. repeat VUAS treatment (50% vs. 37%), previous radiation vs. no radiation (42% vs. 43%), and TR vs. TI (37% vs. 53%; all p ≥ 0.1). Postoperative de novo incontinence was more common after TI vs. TR (31% vs. 12%; p = 0.032), no difference was observed for previous radiation therapy vs. no radiation therapy (18% vs. 18%; p > 0.9) or primary vs. repeat VUAS treatment (22% vs. 16%; p = 0.5).CONCLUSION: VUAS recurrence after endoscopic treatment is not predictable. Endoscopic treatment with TI showed a higher risk for de novo incontinence than TR, and previous irradiation and the number of treatments do not influence incontinence.

U2 - 10.1007/s00345-020-03157-4

DO - 10.1007/s00345-020-03157-4

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 32236662

VL - 39

SP - 89

EP - 95

JO - WORLD J UROL

JF - WORLD J UROL

SN - 0724-4983

IS - 1

ER -