Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  828 844 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 828 844 Next Page
Page Background

incontinence, one of them severe enough to require

an ATOMS implant (AMI, Vienna, Austria). Another

two patients in the control group had incontinence due

to detrusor hyperactivity, and a further patient had mixed

incontinence. Detrusor overactivity was observed in four

patients, three in the control group and one in the ARVUS

group. Erection was evaluated in patients with initial IIEF-5

score 19. At 6 and 12 mo, 40.0% and 73.33% of patients in

the control group and 38.8% and 72.22% of patients in the

ARVUS group could achieve erection

( Table 3 )

. Univariate

analysis showed that the type of the operation was the only

predictive factor of continence at 8 wk (OR 8.486, 95% CI

2.774–25.954;

p

<

0.001).

4.

Discussion

PPI is a common complication that significantly impairs

quality of life

[17]

. Some men suffering from PPI are even

willing to undergo another surgery such as placement of a

sling, adjustable balloons, urethral bulking agents, or an

artificial urinary sphincter

[18]

. Robotic surgery with its

technical advantages has the potential to enhance and

improve RP, especially in terms of continence

[4]

. At our

institution, we perform approximately 240 RARPs every

year. Patients are then monitored for oncologic and

functional outcomes and we try to help patients with PPI

in cooperation with a physiotherapist.

In designing our ARVUS approach, we were inspired by

the work of Dal Moro et al.

[11]

, who introduced a new

reconstruction technique for posterior urethral support in

non-NS RARP. There are clear benefits of NS techniques for

erectile function recovery

[19]

, but their positive role in

improving continence is not unanimously accepted

[20] .

Nevertheless, extending the approach of Dal Moro

et al, we developed a technique for obviating neurovascular

bundle damage in patients undergoing NS RARP. Inclusion

of patients treated with NS RARP better reflects everyday

clinical practice. From our own observations and the

literature

[21]

, the fibres of the levator ani muscle and

levator ani fascia, together with the prostatic fascia, are in

close contact with the rhabdosphincter and prostate. In

performing RARP, these structures are carefully separated.

In our view, we should try to restore these functional-

anatomical relations. We hypothesise that there are several

possible effects of ARVUS that we believe were not fully

explained by Dal Moro et al.

[11]

. (1) We create a dorsal

dynamic suspensory support for the urethra similar to sling

operations. (2) We reconstruct the dorsal musculofascial

plate, which serves as a fixation point for the rhabdos-

pincter fibres. This constitutes the most widely used

principle described by Rocco and colleagues. (3) Posterior

reconstruction avoids tension on the anastomosis and (4)

prevents bladder prolapse (the free space previously

occupied by the prostate is filled). (5) This procedure can

also reduce the probability of urethrovesical anastomosis

leakage, which is important for proper anastomosis healing,

and (6) can improve haemostasis

[4] .

(7) In the final step,

the arcus tendineus is reattached to the bladder neck, which

allows anterior stabilisation of the vesicourethral complex

[22]

, restoring the anatomy closer to the presurgical state

and rebuilding an effective pressure transmission system to

prevent PPI

[20]

. In our opinion, the better functional results

observed in our study are due not only due to the possible

physiological role of our reconstruction approach but also to

a well-performed resection phase consisting of sparing

techniques (preservation of urethral length, bladder neck,

puboprostatic ligaments, and nerves).

Cognisant of the ambiguity of continence definitions in

the literature

[4] ,

we decided to use both a validated

questionnaire (ICIQ-SF) and 0 pads/d to define continence.

In our view, the methods used do not undermine the

validity of this study, since it was a randomised trial. Pad

tests were not used given our experience with noncompli-

ance.

The ARVUS group showed improved early continence

rates compared to the control group immediately after

catheter removal and at 2, 4, and 8 wk after catheter

removal, even though the immediate continence difference

between the groups (24 h) was not statistically significant.

The 6- and 12-mo results showed better continence rates in

the ARVUS group. Concerning erectile function, there was

no difference between the two groups. More than 70% of the

patients who had good preoperative erectile function had

restored function at 12 mo.

Our results are in accordance with other studies showing

the benefits of functional reconstruction on early recovery

(30 d after surgery) of urinary continence, although

reconstruction techniques and continence definitions vary.

In a nonrandomised single-arm study, Porpiglia et al.

[14]

recorded promising continence rates of 71.8%, 77.8%, 89.3%,

94.4%, and 98.0% at 24 h and 1, 4, 12, and 24wk, respectively,

after catheter removal. In a randomised clinical trial, Jeong

et al.

[23]

observed a shorter time to social continence for

their one-step posterior reconstruction (18 d) compared to

no reconstruction (30 d). In two other randomised clinical

trials, Hurtes et al.

[24]

and Koliakos et al.

[25]

found better

early continence rates after combined posterior and anterior

reconstructions compared to standard single-layer anasto-

mosis. In the largest prospective study to date (803 patients),

Coelho et al.

[26]

observed a shorter interval to urinary

continence recovery and, similar to our findings, no

significant difference in long-term continence rates. Two

other randomised clinical trials provided contradictory

results. Although Menon et al.

[27]

showed high continence

rates for anterior and posterior reconstruction, these authors

also found similar results in their control group (single-layer

Table 3 – Patients achieving erectio

n a

Time point

Patients achieving erection,

n

(%)

Control group (

n

= 34)

ARVUS group (

n

= 32)

Before surgery

15

18

6 mo

6 (40.0)

7 (38.8)

12 mo

11 (73.33)

13 (72.22)

ARVUS = advanced reconstruction of vesicourethral support.

a

Erection was defined as an International Index of Erectile Function-5

score 19.

E U R O P E A N U R O L O G Y 7 1 ( 2 0 1 7 ) 8 2 2 – 8 3 0

828