POST-PROSTATEKTOMİ İNKONTİNANSTA İNTRİNSİK SFİNKTER DİSFONKSİYONU DIŞINDAKİ NEDENLER DE AKILDA BULUNDURULMALIDIR

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmada radikal prostatektomiden 12 ay sonra persistan inkontinansı olan hastalarda üriner inkontinans nedenleri ve eşlik eden mesane patolojilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem: Ocak 2015 ile Aralık 2020 tarihleri arasında lokalize prostat kanseri nedeniyle açık radikal retropubik prostatektomi (RRP) uygulanan ve cerrahiden sonra inkontinansı olan ve urodinami yapılmış olan 34 hasta retrospektif olarak incelendi. Tüm ürodinamik çalışmalar, iyi ürodinamik uygulama ICS protokolüne göre yapıldı ve değerlendirmeleri aynı doktor tarafından yapıldı. Hastalar vücut kitle indeksi, komorbidite, ameliyat öncesi PSA düzeyi, prostat hacmi, prostat, prostat biyopsi Gleason skoru, klinik evre, patolojik ISUP grade, patolojik evre, kaçırma anket lenf nodu pozitifliği, uluslararası inkontinans sorgulama formu–kısa form ve ped kullanımı için öznel anket dahil olmak üzere demografik ve klinik parametreleri ile değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Ürodinamik çalışmalar 29 hastada (%85.2) intrinsik sfinkter yetersizliği (ISY) olduğunu gösterdi. Bu 29 hastanın 9’unda (%26,4); sekonder aşırı aktif mesane (AAM), bozulmuş detrusör kontraktilitesi (BDK) ve AAM+BDK, sırasıyla 9 (%11,6), 4 (%11,6), 1 (%2,9) hastada saptandı. On dokuz hastada (%55.8) tek ISY tanısı varken, 15 hastada (%44.1) ISY dışında başka bir birincil tanı veya ikincil tanı vardı. Sonuç: Radikal prostatektomi sonrası hastalarda persistan üriner inkontinansın en sık nedeni intrinsik sfinter yetmezliği olmasına rağmen, hastaların önemli bir kısmında aşırı aktif mesane ve bozulmuş detrüsör kontraktilitesinin de eşlik ettiği göz önünde bulundurulmalıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• prostat kanseri
• prostatektomi sonrası inkontinans
• ürodinami

KEEP IN MIND OTHER CAUSES THAN INTRINSIC SPHINCTER DYSFUNCTION IN POST-PROSTATECTOMY INCONTINENCE

Öz

Objective: This study aims to determine the causes of urinary incontinence and accompanying bladder pathologies in patients with persistent incontinence 12 months after radical prostatectomy. Methods: Thirty-four patients who underwent open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) due to localized prostate cancer and incontinent after surgery between January 2015 and December 2020 and underwent urodynamic study (UDS) were retrospectively reviewed. All UDSs were performed according to the ICS protocol of good urodynamic practice and assessed by the same doctor. Patients were assessed by demographic and clinical parameters including age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidity, preoperative PSA level, prostate volume (PV), transrectal prostate biopsy Gleason score, clinical stage, pathological ISUP grade, pathological stage, lymph node positivity, international consultation on incontinence questionnaire-short form and subjective questionnaire for daily pad use. Results: Urodynamic studies showed that 29 patients (85.2%) had intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD). Nine (26.4%) of 29 patients with ISD had a secondary diagnosis of overactive bladder (OAB), impaired detrusor contractility (IDC) and OAB+IDC 9 (11.6%), 4 (11.6%), 1 (2.9%), respectively. Nineteen patients (55.8%) had a sole diagnosis of ISD, whereas 15 patients (44.1%) had another primary diagnosis or a secondary diagnosis other than ISD. Conclusion: Although ISD is the most common cause of persistent urinary incontinence in patients after radical prostatectomy, it should be taken into account that overactive bladder and impaired detrusor contractility are also accompanied by a significant proportion of patients.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• prostate cancer
• post-prostatectomy incontinence
• urodynamics

Kaynakça

1. 1. Taitt HE. Global Trends and Prostate Cancer: A Review of Incidence, Detection, and Mortality as Influenced by Race, Ethnicity, and Geographic Location. Am J Mens Health. 2018;12(6):1807-1823. doi:10.1177/1557988318798279
2. 2. Smith DP, King MT, Egger S, et al. Quality of life three years after diagnosis of localised prostate cancer: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2009;339(nov27 2):b4817-b4817. doi:10.1136/bmj.b4817
3. 3. Srivastava A, Chopra S, Pham A, et al. Effect of a Risk-stratified Grade of Nerve-sparing Technique on Early Return of Continence After Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2013;63(3):438-444. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.07.009
4. 4. Schlomm T, Heinzer H, Steuber T, et al. Full Functional-Length Urethral Sphincter Preservation During Radical Prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2011;60(2):320-329. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2011.02.040
5. 5. Schäfer W, Abrams P, Liao L, et al. Good urodynamic practices: Uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies**. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(3):261-274. doi:10.1002/nau.10066
6. 6. Blaivas JG. Urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. Cancer. 1995;75(7 S). doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19950401)75:7+<1978::AID-CNCR2820751637>3.0.CO;2-4
7. 7. Strasser H, Bartsch G. Anatomy and innervation of the rhabdosphincter of the male urethra. Semin Urol Oncol. 2000;18(1).
8. 8. Steiner MS. Continence-preserving anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy: The “no-touch” technique. Curr Urol Rep. 2000;1(1):20-27. doi:10.1007/s11934-000-0031-3

9. 9. Tuygun C, Imamoglu A, Keyik B, Alisir I, Yorubulut M. Significance of fibrosis around and/or at external urinary sphincter on pelvic magnetic resonance imaging in patients with postprostatectomy incontinence. Urology. 2006;68(6):1308-1312. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2006.08.1080
10. 10. GROUTZ A, BLAIVAS JG, CHAIKIN DC, WEISS JP, VERHAAREN M. THE PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF POST-RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY INCONTINENCE: A CLINICAL AND VIDEO URODYNAMIC STUDY. Journal of Urology. 2000;163(6):1767-1770. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67538-6
11. 11. Kadono Y, Ueno S, Yaegashi H, et al. Urodynamic Evaluation Before and Immediately After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy. Urology. 2014;84(1):106-111. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2014.04.005
12. 12. Barnoiu OS, Garcia Galisteo E, Baron Lopez F, et al. Prospective Urodynamic Model for Prediction of Urinary Incontinence after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy. Urol Int. 2014;92(3):306-309. doi:10.1159/000354352
13. 13. Majoros A, Bach D, Keszthelyi A, Hamvas A, Romics I. Urinary incontinence and voiding dysfunction after radical retropubic prostatectomy (prospective urodynamic study). Neurourol Urodyn. 2006;25(1):2-7. doi:10.1002/nau.20190
14. 14. Song C, Lee J, Hong JH, Choo MS, Kim CS, Ahn H. Urodynamic interpretation of changing bladder function and voiding pattern after radical prostatectomy: a long-term follow-up. BJU Int. 2010;106(5):681-686. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09189.x
15. 15. Natsume O, Kondo H, Cho M, Fujimoto K, Ozono S, Hirao Y. The impact of radical prostatectomy on patient well-being: A prospective urodynamic study focused on detrusor function. Acta Urologica Japonica. 2004;50(1).
16. 16. Mucciardi G, Galì A, Inferrera A, et al. Longitudinal observational cohort study about detrusor underactivity as a risk factor for bladder neck contracture after retropubic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Int Urol Nephrol. 2013;45(3):721-726. doi:10.1007/s11255-013-0426-y
17. 17. MITSUI T, TANAKA H, HARABAYASHI T, et al. Changes in Urodynamics and Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms after Radical Prostatectomy: Implications of Preoperative Detrusor Contractility. LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms. 2012;4(2):82-86. doi:10.1111/j.1757-5672.2011.00133.x
18. 18. Matsukawa Y, Hattori R, Komatsu T, Funahashi Y, Sassa N, Gotoh M. De novo detrusor underactivity after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. International Journal of Urology. 2010;17(7):643-648. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2010.02529.x
19. 19. Kleinhans B, Gerharz E, Melekos M, Weingärtner K, Kälble T, Riedmiller H. Changes of Urodynamic Findings after Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 1999;35(3):217-222. doi:10.1159/000019843
20. 20. Kitta T, Kanno Y, Chiba H, et al. Radical prostatectomy restores detrusor contraction pattern according to pressure flow parameters. International Journal of Urology. 2017;24(4):301-307. doi:10.1111/iju.13295
21. 21. Kadono Y, Ueno S, Kadomoto S, et al. Use of preoperative factors including urodynamic evaluations and nerve-sparing status for predicting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Nerve-sparing technique contributes to the reduction of postprostatectomy incontin. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(8):1034-1039. doi:10.1002/nau.22877
22. 22. Jiang YH, Hong YL, Kuo HC. Urodynamic changes in patients with prostate cancer undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A comparison with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urol Sci. 2017;28(3):174-179. doi:10.1016/j.urols.2017.07.004
23. 23. Iguchi K, Tanaka T, Minami A, Kuratsukuri K, Uchida J, Nakatani T. Characteristics of urodynamic study parameters associated with intermediate-term continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in elderly patients. The Aging Male. 2020;23(5):1039-1045. doi:10.1080/13685538.2019.1659767
24. 24. Giannantoni A, Mearini E, Zucchi A, et al. Bladder and Urethral Sphincter Function after Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: A Prospective Long-Term Study. Eur Urol. 2008;54(3):657-664. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2007.10.054
25. 25. GIANNANTONI A, MEARINI E, di STASI SM, et al. ASSESSMENT OF BLADDER AND URETHRAL SPHINCTER FUNCTION BEFORE AND AFTER RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY. Journal of Urology. 2004;171(4):1563-1566. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000118957.24390.66
26. 26. Dubbelman Y, Groen J, Wildhagen M, Rikken B, Bosch R. Quantification of changes in detrusor function and pressure-flow parameters after radical prostatectomy: Relation to postoperative continence status and the impact of intensity of pelvic floor muscle exercises. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31(5):637-641. doi:10.1002/nau.21199
27. 27. Rudy DC, Woodside JR, Crawford ED. Urodynamic Evaluation of incontinence in Patients Undergoing Modified Campbell Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: A Prospective Study. Journal of Urology. 1984;132(4):708-712. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(17)49836-3
28. 28. Constantinou CE, Freiha FS. Impact of Radical Prostatectomy on the Characteristics of Bladder and Urethra. Journal of Urology. 1992;148(4):1215-1219. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(17)36864-7
29. 29. Takenaka A, Soga H, Murakami G, et al. Understanding Anatomy of “Hilus” of Detrusor Nerves to Avoid Bladder Dysfunction After Pelvic Surgery: Demonstration Using Fetal and Adult Cadavers. Urology. 2009;73(2):251-257. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2008.09.039
30. 30. Oszczudłowski M, Bilski K, Kozikowski M, Dobruch J. De Novo Detrusor Underactivity and Other Urodynamic Findings after Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review. Medicina (B Aires). 2022;58(3):381. doi:10.3390/medicina58030381
31. 31. Tavukçu HH, Aytac O, Atug F. Nerve-sparing techniques and results in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Investig Clin Urol. 2016;57(Suppl 2):S172. doi:10.4111/icu.2016.57.S2.S172