Yeungnam Univ J Med.  2018 Dec;35(2):141-149. 10.12701/yujm.2018.35.2.141.

Functional recovery after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Urology, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea. urokyh@naver.com

Abstract

With the enthusiasm regarding robotic application in radical prostatectomy in accordance with the widespread use of serum prostate-specific antigen as a screening test, the number of surgeries performed for complete removal of the gland is increasing continuously. However, owing to the adjacent anatomical location of the prostate to the nerve and urethral sphincter complex, functional recovery, namely improvement from post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) and post-prostatectomy erectile dysfunction, still remains a main problem for patients who are reluctant to undergo surgery and tend to choose alternative ways instead. Since the late 1980s, the introduction of radical prostatectomy by open surgical modalities, the depth of the anatomical understanding of the structure surrounding the prostate is getting tremendous, which leads to the development of new surgical modalities and techniques that are consequently aimed at reducing the incidences of PPI and erectile dysfunction. Briefly, recent data from robotic radical prostatectomy, particularly on PPI, are quite acceptable, but by contrast, the reported potency regain rate still remains < 20%, which indicates the need for advanced surgical modification to overcome it. In this review, the authors summarized the recent findings on the anatomy and surgical techniques reported up to now.

Keyword

Erectile dysfunction; Post-prostatectomy incontinence; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Robotic surgery

MeSH Terms

Erectile Dysfunction
Humans
Incidence
Male
Mass Screening
Prostate*
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Prostatectomy*
Prostatic Neoplasms*
Urethra
Prostate-Specific Antigen

Reference

1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014; 64:9–29.
Article
2. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015; 136:E359–86.
Article
3. Song C, Kang T, Lee MS, Ro JY, Lee SE, Lee E, et al. Clinicopathological characteristics of prostate cancer in Korean men and nomograms for the prediction of the pathological stage of the clinically localized prostate cancer: a multi-institutional update. Korean J Urol. 2007; 48:125–30. Korean.
Article
4. Song K, Song C, Ahn H. Continuing trends of the clinical parameter migration in patients with prostate cancer in Korea. Korean J Urol. 2007; 48:574–8. Korean.
Article
5. Klingler HC, Marberger M. Incontinence after radical prostatectomy: surgical treatment options. Curr Opin Urol. 2006; 16:60–4.
6. Peterson AC, Chen Y. Patient reported incontinence after radical prostatectomy is more common than expected and not associated with the nerve sparing technique: results from the Center for Prostate Disease Research (CPDR) database. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012; 31:60–3.
Article
7. Liss MA, Osann K, Canvasser N, Chu W, Chang A, Gan J, et al. Continence definition after radical prostatectomy using urinary quality of life: evaluation of patient reported validated questionnaires. J Urol. 2010; 183:1464–8.
Article
8. Ficarra V, Sooriakumaran P, Novara G, Schatloff O, Briganti A, Van der Poel H, et al. Systematic review of methods for reporting combined outcomes after radical prostatectomy and proposal of a novel system: the survival, continence, and potency (SCP) classification. Eur Urol. 2012; 61:541–8.
Article
9. Kaye KW, Milne N, Creed K, van der Werf B. The ‘urogenital diaphragm’, external urethral sphincter and radical prostatectomy. Aust N Z J Surg. 1997; 67:40–4.
Article
10. Dorschner W, Biesold M, Schmidt F, Stolzenburg JU. The dispute about the external sphincter and the urogenital diaphragm. J Urol. 1999; 162:1942–5.
Article
11. Walz J, Burnett AL, Costello AJ, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Guillonneau B, et al. A critical analysis of the current knowledge of surgical anatomy related to optimization of cancer control and preservation of continence and erection in candidates for radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2010; 57:179–92.
Article
12. Walz J, Epstein JI, Ganzer R, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Kaouk J, et al. A critical analysis of the current knowledge of surgical anatomy of the prostate related to optimisation of cancer control and preservation of continence and erection in candidates for radical prostatectomy: an update. Eur Urol. 2016; 70:301–11.
Article
13. Myers RP, Cahill DR, Kay PA, Camp JJ, Devine RM, King BF, et al. Puboperineales: muscular boundaries of the male urogenital hiatus in 3D from magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol. 2000; 164:1412–5.
Article
14. Sridhar AN, Abozaid M, Rajan P, Sooriakumaran P, Shaw G, Nathan S, et al. Surgical techniques to optimize early urinary continence recovery post robot assisted radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep. 2017; 18:71.
Article
15. Dorschner W, Stolzenburg JU, Neuhaus J. Structure and function of the bladder neck. Adv Anat Embryol Cell Biol. 2001; 159:III–XII. 1-109.
Article
16. Friedlander DF, Alemozaffar M, Hevelone ND, Lipsitz SR, Hu JC. Stepwise description and outcomes of bladder neck sparing during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2012; 188:1754–60.
Article
17. Ma X, Tang K, Yang C, Wu G, Xu N, Wang M, et al. Bladder neck preservation improves time to continence after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 2016; 7:67463–75.
Article
18. Ko YH, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Sivaraman A, Schatloff O, Cheon J, et al. Factors affecting return of continence 3 months after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: analysis from a large, prospective data by a single surgeon. J Urol. 2012; 187:190–4.
Article
19. Reeves F, Preece P, Kapoor J, Everaerts W, Murphy DG, Corcoran NM, et al. Preservation of the neurovascular bundles is associated with improved time to continence after radical prostatectomy but not long-term continence rates: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2015; 68:692–704.
Article
20. Takenaka A, Tewari AK, Leung RA, Bigelow K, El-Tabey N, Murakami G, et al. Preservation of the puboprostatic collar and puboperineoplasty for early recovery of urinary continence after robotic prostatectomy: anatomic basis and preliminary outcomes. Eur Urol. 2007; 51:433–40.
Article
21. Rocco F, Carmignani L, Acquati P, Gadda F, Dell'Orto P, Rocco B, et al. Early continence recovery after open radical prostatectomy with restoration of the posterior aspect of the rhabdosphincter. Eur Urol. 2007; 52:376–83.
Article
22. Patel VR, Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, Rocco B. Periurethral suspension stitch during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the technique and continence outcomes. Eur Urol. 2009; 56:472–8.
Article
23. Porpiglia F, Bertolo R, Manfredi M, De Luca S, Checcucci E, Morra I, et al. Total anatomical reconstruction during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: implications on early recovery of urinary continence. Eur Urol. 2016; 69:485–95.
Article
24. Borin JF, Skarecky DW, Narula N, Ahlering TE. Impact of urethral stump length on continence and positive surgical margins in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology. 2007; 70:173–7.
Article
25. Patel VR, Samavedi S, Bates AS, Kumar A, Coelho R, Rocco B, et al. Dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane allograft nerve wrap around the prostatic neurovascular bundle accelerates early return to continence and potency following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: propensity score-matched analysis. Eur Urol. 2015; 67:977–80.
Article
26. Ogaya-Pinies G, Palayapalam-Ganapathi H, Rogers T, Hernandez-Cardona E, Rocco B, Coelho RF, et al. Can dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane accelerate the return to potency after a nerve-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy? Propensity score-matched analysis. J Robot Surg. 2018; 12:235–43.
Article
27. Park SW, Kim TN, Nam JK, Ha HK, Shin DG, Lee W, et al. Recovery of overall exercise ability, quality of life, and continence after 12-week combined exercise intervention in elderly patients who underwent radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled study. Urology. 2012; 80:299–305.
Article
28. Mandel P, Preisser F, Graefen M, Steuber T, Salomon G, Haese A, et al. High chance of late recovery of urinary and erectile function beyond 12 months after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2017; 71:848–50.
Article
29. Mulhall JP. Defining and reporting erectile function outcomes after radical prostatectomy: challenges and misconceptions. J Urol. 2009; 181:462–71.
Article
30. Sridhar AN, Cathcart PJ, Yap T, Hines J, Nathan S, Briggs TP, et al. Recovery of baseline erectile function in men following radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: a prospective analysis using validated measures. J Sex Med. 2016; 13:435–43.
Article
31. Salonia A, Adaikan G, Buvat J, Carrier S, El-Meliegy A, Hatzimouratidis K, et al. Sexual rehabilitation after treatment for prostate cancer-part 2: recommendations from the fourth International Consultation for Sexual Medicine (ICSM 2015). J Sex Med. 2017; 14:297–315.
Article
32. Ahlering TE, Skarecky DW. Preserving sexual function after robotic radical prostatectomy: avoiding thermal energy near nerves. BJU Int. 2014; 114:131–2.
Article
33. Montorsi F, Brock G, Lee J, Shapiro J, Van Poppel H, Graefen M, et al. Effect of nightly versus on-demand vardenafil on recovery of erectile function in men following bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2008; 54:924–31.
Article
34. Bannowsky A, Schulze H, van der Horst C, Hautmann S, Jünemann KP. Recovery of erectile function after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: improvement with nightly low-dose sildenafil. BJU Int. 2008; 101:1279–83.
Article
35. Padma-Nathan H, McCullough AR, Levine LA, Lipshultz LI, Siegel R, Montorsi F, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of postoperative nightly sildenafil citrate for the prevention of erectile dysfunction after bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Int J Impot Res. 2008; 20:479–86.
Article
36. Pace G, Del Rosso A, Vicentini C. Penile rehabilitation therapy following radical prostatectomy. Disabil Rehabil. 2010; 32:1204–8.
Article
37. Aydogdu O, Gokce MI, Burgu B, Baltacı S, Yaman O. Tadalafil rehabilitation therapy preserves penile size after bilateral nerve sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Int Braz J Urol. 2011; 37:336–44.
Article
38. Bannowsky A, van Ahlen H, Loch T. Increasing the dose of vardenafil on a daily basis does not improve erectile function after unilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. J Sex Med. 2012; 9:1448–53.
Article
39. Montorsi F, Brock G, Stolzenburg JU, Mulhall J, Moncada I, Patel HR, et al. Effects of tadalafil treatment on erectile function recovery following bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: a randomised placebo-controlled study (REACTT). Eur Urol. 2014; 65:587–96.
Article
40. Nakano Y, Miyake H, Chiba K, Fujisawa M. Impact of penile rehabilitation with low-dose vardenafil on recovery of erectile function in Japanese men following nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Asian J Androl. 2014; 16:892–6.
Article
41. Seo YE, Kim SD, Kim TH, Sung GT. The efficacy and safety of tadalafil 5 mg once daily in the treatment of erectile dysfunction after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 1-year follow-up. Korean J Urol. 2014; 55:112–9.
Article
42. Natali A, Masieri L, Lanciotti M, Giancane S, Vignolini G, Carini M, et al. A comparison of different oral therapies versus no treatment for erectile dysfunction in 196 radical nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy patients. Int J Impot Res. 2015; 27:1–5.
Article
43. Canat L, Güner B, Gürbüz C, Atış G, Çaşkurlu T. Effects of three-times-per-week versus on-demand tadalafil treatment on erectile function and continence recovery following bilateral nerve sparing radical prostatectomy: results of a prospective, randomized, and single-center study. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2015; 31:90–5.
Article
44. Liu C, Lopez DS, Chen M, Wang R. Penile rehabilitation therapy following radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis. J Sex Med. 2017; 14:1496–503.
Article
45. Montorsi F, Guazzoni G, Strambi LF, Da Pozzo LF, Nava L, Barbieri L, et al. Recovery of spontaneous erectile function after nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy with and without early intracavernous injections of alprostadil: results of a prospective, randomized trial. J Urol. 1997; 158:1408–10.
Article
46. Mulhall J, Land S, Parker M, Waters WB, Flanigan RC. The use of an erectogenic pharmacotherapy regimen following radical prostatectomy improves recovery of spontaneous erectile function. J Sex Med. 2005; 2:532–40.
Article
47. Raina R, Agarwal A, Ausmundson S, Lakin M, Nandipati KC, Montague DK, et al. Early use of vacuum constriction device following radical prostatectomy facilitates early sexual activity and potentially earlier return of erectile function. Int J Impot Res. 2006; 18:77–81.
Article
48. Köhler TS, Pedro R, Hendlin K, Utz W, Ugarte R, Reddy P, et al. A pilot study on the early use of the vacuum erection device after radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2007; 100:858–62.
Article
Full Text Links
  • YUJM
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr