Cargando…

Minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary?

OBJECTIVES AND AIMS: To avoid damage to the ureters during bladder neck preparation in radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, it may be helpful to insert ureteral stents temporarily or to intravenously administer indigo carmine dye for enhanced visualisation of ureteric orifices. We evaluated ou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schlenker, B, Gratzke, C, Seitz, M, von Walter, P, Tilki, D, Reich, O, Zaak, D, Stief, CG, Bader, MJ
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3352218/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20452897
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2047-783X-15-3-121
_version_ 1782232869781897216
author Schlenker, B
Gratzke, C
Seitz, M
von Walter, P
Tilki, D
Reich, O
Zaak, D
Stief, CG
Bader, MJ
author_facet Schlenker, B
Gratzke, C
Seitz, M
von Walter, P
Tilki, D
Reich, O
Zaak, D
Stief, CG
Bader, MJ
author_sort Schlenker, B
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES AND AIMS: To avoid damage to the ureters during bladder neck preparation in radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, it may be helpful to insert ureteral stents temporarily or to intravenously administer indigo carmine dye for enhanced visualisation of ureteric orifices. We evaluated our bladder neck preserving technique at radical prostatectomy with regard to ureteric injuries. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed 369 consecutive radical prostatectomies operated in our clinic in a bladder neck preserving technique. The following parameters were assessed in this retrospective study: number of prophylactic ureteric stent insertions, application of indigo carmine dye, observed injuries of the ureters by the surgeon, postoperative increase of serum creatinine and postoperative status of kidney ultrasound. RESULTS: In 7/369 prostatectomies (1.90%) a ureteric stent insertion was performed, indigo carmine was not applied to any patient at all, yet no intraoperative injury of a ureter was observed by a surgeon. No revision was necessary due to a ureteral injury within the observation period of one year after surgery. In 17 patients with preoperative normal creatinine value a pathological value was observed on the first postoperative day (mean 1.4 mg/dl). In these patients no consecutive postrenal acute renal failure was observed, no hydronephrosis was monitored by ultrasound and no further intervention was necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder neck preserving operation technique does not implicate the need of prophylactic ureteric stent insertions and has no higher incidence of ureteric injuries.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3352218
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33522182012-05-16 Minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary? Schlenker, B Gratzke, C Seitz, M von Walter, P Tilki, D Reich, O Zaak, D Stief, CG Bader, MJ Eur J Med Res Research OBJECTIVES AND AIMS: To avoid damage to the ureters during bladder neck preparation in radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, it may be helpful to insert ureteral stents temporarily or to intravenously administer indigo carmine dye for enhanced visualisation of ureteric orifices. We evaluated our bladder neck preserving technique at radical prostatectomy with regard to ureteric injuries. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analysed 369 consecutive radical prostatectomies operated in our clinic in a bladder neck preserving technique. The following parameters were assessed in this retrospective study: number of prophylactic ureteric stent insertions, application of indigo carmine dye, observed injuries of the ureters by the surgeon, postoperative increase of serum creatinine and postoperative status of kidney ultrasound. RESULTS: In 7/369 prostatectomies (1.90%) a ureteric stent insertion was performed, indigo carmine was not applied to any patient at all, yet no intraoperative injury of a ureter was observed by a surgeon. No revision was necessary due to a ureteral injury within the observation period of one year after surgery. In 17 patients with preoperative normal creatinine value a pathological value was observed on the first postoperative day (mean 1.4 mg/dl). In these patients no consecutive postrenal acute renal failure was observed, no hydronephrosis was monitored by ultrasound and no further intervention was necessary. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder neck preserving operation technique does not implicate the need of prophylactic ureteric stent insertions and has no higher incidence of ureteric injuries. BioMed Central 2010-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3352218/ /pubmed/20452897 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2047-783X-15-3-121 Text en Copyright ©2010 I. Holzapfel Publishers
spellingShingle Research
Schlenker, B
Gratzke, C
Seitz, M
von Walter, P
Tilki, D
Reich, O
Zaak, D
Stief, CG
Bader, MJ
Minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary?
title Minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary?
title_full Minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary?
title_fullStr Minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary?
title_full_unstemmed Minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary?
title_short Minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary?
title_sort minimizing complications during retropubic radical prostatectomy - is ureteral stenting necessary?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3352218/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20452897
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2047-783X-15-3-121
work_keys_str_mv AT schlenkerb minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary
AT gratzkec minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary
AT seitzm minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary
AT vonwalterp minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary
AT tilkid minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary
AT reicho minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary
AT zaakd minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary
AT stiefcg minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary
AT badermj minimizingcomplicationsduringretropubicradicalprostatectomyisureteralstentingnecessary