Prospective assessment of patient reported urinary continence after radical prostatectomy
Prospective assessment of patient reported urinary continence after radical prostatectomy
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0022-5347(05)67294-1
复制
发表时间：
2000-09-01
影响因子：
6.6
通讯作者：
Sanda, MG
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wei, JT;Dunn, RL;Sanda, MG
目的：报道的根治性前列腺切除术后尿失禁率各不相同。尽管对根治性前列腺切除术的改进旨在改善预后，如保留神经或保留膀胱颈，已被广泛使用，但据我们所知，基于患者报告支持这些做法的证据很少。我们评估了神经保留和膀胱颈保留对根治性前列腺切除术后尿失禁的潜在影响，并评估了各种尿失禁定义对观察结果的影响。材料和方法：我们前瞻性地评估了一组前列腺癌男性患者，他们选择了有或没有神经保留的手术和膀胱颈部保留作为主要治疗方法。共有482名男性在术前和术后完成了简短的尿失禁问卷调查，中位随访时间为18个月。采用问卷对尿失禁进行前瞻性随访，患者报告的尿失禁恢复情况基于3种尿失禁定义。结果：根据患者报告，当尿失禁被定义为无尿漏时，神经保留组的中位尿失禁恢复时间明显短于非神经保留组(5.3个月对10.9个月，p
Purpose: Reported urinary continence rates after radical prostatectomy vary. Although modifications of radical prostatectomy meant to improve outcome, such as nerve sparing or bladder neck preservation, are in widespread use, to our knowledge evidence to support these practices based on patient report is scant. We evaluated the potential effects of nerve sparing and bladder neck preservation on urinary continence after radical prostatectomy, and assessed the impact of various urinary continence definitions on the observed outcome.Materials and Methods: We prospectively evaluated a cohort of men with prostate cancer who elected surgery with and without nerve sparing, and bladder neck preservation as primary therapy. A total of 482 men completed a brief urinary continence questionnaire preoperatively and postoperatively at a median followup of 18 months. Urinary continence was followed prospectively using the questionnaire and patient reported urinary continence recovery was based on 3 definitions of continence.Results: Median time to continence recovery based on patient reporting was significantly shorter in the nerve sparing than in the nonnerve sparing group when continence was defined as no urinary leakage (5.3 versus 10.9 months, p