经闭孔盆底网片球部尿道悬吊术治疗前列腺切除术后尿失禁的中长期疗效分析

丁留成; 黄懿; 舒乐; 张思聪; 陈正森; 沈百欣; 薛珺; 韶云鹏; 顾民; 卫中庆

doi:10.13201/j.issn.1001-1420.2022.08.004

经闭孔盆底网片球部尿道悬吊术治疗前列腺切除术后尿失禁的中长期疗效分析

- 南京医科大学第二附属医院泌尿外科(南京，210011)
基金项目:
南医大二附院789人才基金资助(2020年)；国家重点研发计划主动健康和老龄化科技应对重点专项(No：2018YFC202204)

详细信息

通讯作者: 卫中庆，E-mail：weizq1@163.com

中图分类号: R694

收稿日期: 2022-03-03

刊出日期: 2022-08-06

Medium and long-term efficacy with transobturator bulbourethral suspension with Pelvic sling for the treatment of post-prostatectomy incontinence

- Department of Urology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210011, China

More Information

Corresponding author: WEI Zhongqing, E-mail: weizq1@163.com

Received Date: 03 March 2022

Publish Date: 06 August 2022

摘要

摘要: 目的评估经闭孔盆底网片球部尿道悬吊术治疗男性前列腺切除术后尿失禁(post-prostatectomy incontinence，PPI)的中长期疗效。方法回顾性分析2018年4月—2020年4月南京医科大学第二附属医院12例PPI患者(9例前列腺癌根治术后，3例前列腺电切术后)采用经闭孔盆底网片球部尿道悬吊术的临床资料，并通过尿垫实验、国际尿失禁咨询问卷简表(ICIQ-SF)中长期随访以评估其疗效及安全性。结果本组患者中2例轻度尿失禁(24 h使用1~2个尿垫)，7例中度尿失禁(24 h使用3~5个尿垫)和3例严重尿失禁(24 h使用超过5个尿垫)；术前ICIQ-SF评分为(15.3±3.6)分，24 h尿垫数量为(5.4±2.3)个；术后3个月ICIQ-SF评分为(4.8±3.7)分，24 h尿垫数量为(1.8±0.4)个；术后12个月ICIQ-SF评分为(1.9±1.0)分，24 h尿垫数量为(1.2±0.4)个；术后24个月CIQ-SF评分为(1.4±1.2)分，24 h尿垫数量为(1.3±0.5)个。术后75%的患者不使用尿垫或只使用1~2个尿垫，未发现伤口感染、尿道侵蚀等并发症。结论经闭孔盆底网片球部尿道悬吊术是一个治疗前列腺切除术后尿失禁的患者安全有效的选择，但需要更长随访及精准适应证探索。
- 前列腺切除术后尿失禁 /
- 盆底网片 /
- 经闭孔球部尿道悬吊术
Abstract: Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of transobturator bulbourethral suspension with pelvic sling for the treatment of post-prostatectomy incontinence.Methods We retrospectively reviewed outcomes in patients who underwent transobturator bulbourethral suspension with pelvic sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence from April, 2018 to April, 2020 in Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University. Patients were evaluated continence symptoms using a 24-h pad test, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) at 3, 12, and 24 months after surgery.Results Two patients had mild incontinence (1-2 pads/24 hours), seven patients had moderate urinary incontinence (3-5 pads/24 hours), and 3 patients had severe urinary incontinence (more than 5 pads/24 hours). The preoperative ICIQ-SF score was (15.3±3.6), and the number of 24-hour pad result was (5.4±2.3). The ICIQ-SF score was (4.8±3.7), and the number of 24-hour pad result was (1.8±0.4) after three months. The ICIQ-SF score was (1.9±1.0), and the number of the 24-hour pad result was (1.2±0.4) at 12 months. The ICIQ-SF score was (1.4±1.2). and the number of 24-hour pad result was (1.3±0.5) at 24 months after operation. Nine patients did not use pads or only 1-2 pads for 24 hours after surgery, and no complications such as wound infection or urethral erosion were found.Conclusion The transobturator bulbourethral suspension with pelvic sling is an effective option for the post-prostatectomy incontinence patient, but the long-term follow-up reports and suitable indication should be identified.
- post-prostatectomy incontinence /
- pelvic sling /
- transobturator bulbourethral suspension

HTML全文

图 1 赫美网片折叠图

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 手术示意图

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

参考文献(19)

[1]	Cornu JN, Haab F. Urinary incontinence in 2010: the evolution of SUI management[J]. Nat Rev Urol, 2011, 8(2): 68-70. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2010.229
[2]	李东章, 陈永良, 钱卫良, 等. 基于盆底MRI评估年龄与前列腺癌根治术对男性盆底解剖结构及尿控的影响[J]. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2021, 36(10), 769-775. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LCMW202110003.htm
[3]	Bauer RM, Bastian PJ, Gozzi C, et al. Postprostatectomy incontinence: all about diagnosis and management[J]. Eur Urol, 2009, 55(2): 322-33. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.10.029
[4]	Kumar A, Litt ER, Ballert KN, et al. Artificial urinary sphincter versus male sling for post-prostatectomy incontinence--what do patients choose?[J]. J Urol, 2009, 181(3): 1231-1235. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.022
[5]	Mesrine S, Clavel-Chapelon F, Boutron-Ruault MC. Functional outcomes after treatment for prostate cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2013, 368(17): 1653-1654. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1302509
[6]	Heesakkers J, Farag F, Bauer RM, et al. Pathophysiology and Contributing Factors in Postprostatectomy Incontinence: A Review[J]. Eur Urol, 2017, 71(6): 936-944. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.09.031
[7]	von Bodman C, Matsushita K, Savage C, et al. Recovery of urinary function after radical prostatectomy: predictors of urinary function on preoperative prostate magnetic resonance imaging[J]. J Urol, 2012, 187(3): 945-950. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.143
[8]	Rahnama'i MS, Marcelissen T, Geavlete B, et al. Current Management of Post-radical Prostatectomy Urinary Incontinence[J]. Front Surg, 2021, 8: 647656. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.647656
[9]	Constable L, Cotterill N, Cooper D, et al. Male synthetic sling versus artificial urinary sphincter trial for men with urodynamic stress incontinence after prostate surgery(MASTER): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial[J]. Trials, 2018, 19(1): 131. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2501-2
[10]	Grabbert M, Mumm JN, Klehr B, et al. Extended follow-up of the AdVance XP male sling in the treatment of male urinary stress incontinence after 48 months: Results of a prospective and multicenter study[J]. Neurourol Urodyn, 2019, 38(7): 1973-1978. doi: 10.1002/nau.24101
[11]	Soljanik I, Bauer RM, Becker AJ, et al. Morphology and dynamics of the male pelvic floor before and after retrourethral transobturator sling placement: first insight using MRI[J]. World J Urol, 2013, 31(3): 629-638. doi: 10.1007/s00345-012-0884-3
[12]	Bauer RM, Grabbert M, Klehr B, et al. 36-month data for the AdVance XP^® male sling: results of a prospective multicentre study[J]. BJU Int, 2017, 119(4): 626-630. doi: 10.1111/bju.13704
[13]	Bauer RM, Gozzi C, Roosen A, et al. Impact of the 'repositioning test' on postoperative outcome of retroluminar transobturator male sling implantation[J]. Urol Int, 2013, 90(3): 334-338. doi: 10.1159/000347123
[14]	Martinez EJ, Zuckerman JM, Henderson K, et al. Evaluation of salvage male transobturator sling placement following recurrent stress urinary incontinence after failed transobturator sling[J]. Urology, 2015, 85(2): 478-482. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.10.016
[15]	Cornu JN, Sèbe P, Ciofu C, et al. The AdVance transobturator male sling for postprostatectomy incontinence: clinical results of a prospective evaluation after a minimum follow-up of 6 months[J]. Eur Urol, 2009, 56(6): 923-927. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.09.015
[16]	Redmond EJ, Nadeau G, Tu LM, et al. Multicentered Assessment of Clinical Outcomes and Factors Associated With Failure of the Adjustable TransObturator Male System(ATOMS)[J]. Urology, 2021, 148: 280-286. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2020.09.045
[17]	Rehder P, Haab F, Cornu JN, et al. Treatment of postprostatectomy male urinary incontinence with the transobturator retroluminal repositioning sling suspension: 3-year follow-up[J]. Eur Urol, 2012, 62(1): 140-145.
[18]	Bauer RM, Mayer ME, Gratzke C, et al. Prospective evaluation of the functional sling suspension for male postprostatectomy stress urinary incontinence: results after 1 year[J]. Eur Urol, 2009, 56(6): 928-933.
[19]	Stanford JL, Feng Z, Hamilton AS, et al. Urinary and sexual function after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study[J]. JAMA, 2000, 283(3): 354-360.