Role of bladder neck preservation in urinary continence following radical retropubic prostatectomy.
OBJECTIVE
To report our experience of the influence of bladder neck preservation on patient continence.


METHODS
Radical retropubic prostatectomy with bladder neck preservation was performed in 131 patients (age range 48-73 years; mean 64.5 years). Urinary continence was evaluated using a validated questionnaire at follow-up visits and telephone interviews. All patients reporting incontinence were studied using a pad test and urodynamics.


RESULTS
After a mean follow-up period of 21.7 months (range 4-47 months), 115 patients were continent (87%) and 16 incontinent. According to the International Continence Society criteria, three had severe, three moderate and 10 mild incontinence. Urodynamics revealed sphincter deficiency in 15 cases, which was associated with decreased bladder compliance in four, while decreased compliance was the only abnormality in one. Continence was recovered 0-27 months after surgery (mean 3.2 months): 40% of men were continent within the first month and 74% within the third. Histopathology revealed positive margins in 30/131 patients (22%), but exclusively at the bladder neck level in only seven (5%), and two also had positive nodes. Six patients (4.5%) presented bladder neck stenosis requiring transurethral incision. No statistically significant differences were found between the ages of continent and incontinent men or between the time to continence recovery with two different techniques of retropubic hemostasis; however, use of a nerve-sparing technique significantly reduced the time to continence recovery.


CONCLUSIONS
Bladder neck preservation during radical retropubic prostatectomy does not improve the long-term results of urinary continence but does contribute substantially to its earlier recovery, thus improving the quality of life. With proper patient selection the risk of positive margins at the bladder neck level only is reasonably low.
Selli
Cesare
C
Department of Urology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. c.selli@med.unipi.it
De Antoni
Pietro
P
Moro
Umberto
U
Macchiarella
Angelo
A
Giannarini
Gianluca
G
Crisci
Alfonso
A
D000367:Age Factors; D000368:Aged; D015331:Cohort Studies; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D015994:Incidence; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000175:diagnosis; D011336:Probability; D011468:Prostatectomy / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000379:methods*; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D011788:Quality of Life; D018570:Risk Assessment; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D001743:Urinary Bladder / Q000601:surgery*; D014549:Urinary Incontinence / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D014563:Urodynamics; D013520:Urologic Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods