术前及术后膜性尿道长度与腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术后控尿功能恢复的相关性

doi:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2022.02.017

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 探讨术前及术后膜性尿道长度(membranous urethral length,MUL)与腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(laparoscopic radical prostatectomy,LRP)后控尿功能恢复的相关性。方法: 回顾性分析经组织病理学诊断为前列腺腺癌并于北京大学第三医院行LRP的患者69例,患者均于LRP术前及术后行磁共振检查。术前MUL定义为前列腺尖部尿道至阴茎球部尿道之间的距离,术后MUL定义为膀胱颈口至阴茎球部尿道之间的距离,MUL留存比定义为术后MUL占术前MUL的百分比。所有患者均行腹膜外LRP,自术后第1个月起每月对患者的控尿功能恢复情况进行随访,以全天不需要使用尿垫为控尿功能恢复标准。应用Logistic多因素回归分析影响术后3个月控尿功能恢复的危险因素,Kaplan-Meier法绘制LRP术后患者控尿功能恢复曲线,Log-rank检验比较各组间术后控尿功能恢复曲线的统计学意义。结果: 69例患者平均年龄(71.4±8.6)岁;穿刺前平均前列腺特异抗原(23.40±30.31) μg/L;术前磁共振测量前列腺体积(prostatic volume,PV)为12.20~128.48 mL,平均(39.48±22.73) mL;术前MUL为5~22 mm,平均(13.0±3.3) mm;术后MUL为4~22 mm,平均(12.3±3.4) mm;MUL留存比为80%~100%,平均93.9%±6.2%。LRP术后3个月和12个月69例患者控尿率分别为57.9%(40/69)和97.1%(67/69)。单因素分析表明,PV(P=0.028)、术前MUL(P<0.001)和术后MUL(P<0.001)是LRP术后3个月尿失禁的影响因素;多因素分析显示,术后MUL<13 mm是LRP术后3个月尿失禁发生的独立危险因素(P<0.001)。Log-rank检验提示,术前MUL≥14 mm、术后MUL≥13 mm和MUL留存比≥94%的患者术后控尿功能恢复分别优于术前MUL<14 mm、术后MUL<13 mm和MUL留存比<94%的患者,差异具有统计学意义(P=0.001)。结论: 术前MUL、术后MUL和MUL留存比与LRP术后控尿功能恢复存在相关性,术后MUL较短是术后3个月尿失禁发生的独立危险因素。

关键词: 尿失禁, 前列腺切除术, 膜性尿道长度, 磁共振成像, 腹腔镜检查

Abstract:

Objective: To evaluate the relationship between recovery of urinary continence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and preoperative/postoperative membranous urethral length (MUL) on magnetic resonance imaging. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 69 patients with pathologic confirmed prostate carcinoma who underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Preoperative MUL was defined as the distance from the apex of prostate to the level of the urethra at penile bulb on the coronal image. Postoperative MUL was defined as the distance from the bladder neck to the level of the urethra at the penile bulb on the coronal image. MUL-retained rate was defined as the percentage of postoperative MUL to preoperative MUL. All patients received extraperitoneal LRP. Patients reported freedom from using safety pad (0 pad/d) were defined as urinary continence. Multivariate Logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of early continence recovery after LRP. Kaplan-Meier analyses and log-rank test were used to compare time to continence recovery between the groups. Results: For all the 69 patients, the average age was (71.4±8.6) years. The prostate specific antigen before biopsy was (23.40±30.31) μg/L, and the mean preoperative prostatic volume by magnetic resonance imaging was (39.48±22.73) mL. The mean preoperative MUL was (13.0±3.3) mm, the mean postoperative MUL was (12.3±3.4) mm, and the mean MUL-retained rate was 93.9%±6.2%. The continence rate for all the patients after LRP was 57.9% and 97.1% in three months and one year, respectively. The patients achieving early continence recovery had significant smaller prostatic volume (P=0.028), longer preoperative MUL and postoperative MUL (P<0.001). Multivariate Logistic regression analyses revealed postoperative MUL (P<0.001) were predictors of continence recovery after LRP. Kaplan-Meier analyses and Log-rank test revealed that preoperative MUL (≥14 mm vs. <14 mm, P<0.001) and postoperative MUL (≥13 mm vs. <13 mm, P<0.001), MUL-retained rate (<94% vs. ≥94%, P<0.001) were all significantly associated with continence recovery. Conclusion: Post-operative MUL was independently predictors of early continence recovery after LRP. Preoperative MUL, postoperative MUL and MUL retained rate were significantly associated with recovery of urinary continence.

Key words: Urinary incontinence, Prostatectomy, Membranous urethral length, Magnetic resonance imaging, Laparoscopy

中图分类号:

R737.25

张帆,陈曲,郝一昌,颜野,刘承,黄毅,马潞林. 术前及术后膜性尿道长度与腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术后控尿功能恢复的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(2): 299-303.

ZHANG Fan,CHEN Qu,HAO Yi-chang,YAN Ye,LIU Cheng,HUANG Yi,MA Lu-lin. Relationship between recovery of urinary continence after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and preoperative/postoperative membranous urethral length[J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(2): 299-303.

图/表 4

图1

表1

表2

图2

参考文献 18

[1]	Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: Screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent[J]. Euro Urol, 2017, 71(4):618-629. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003
[2]	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: S0302-2838(16)30666-2 pmid: 27720536
[3]	Walz J, Epstein JI, Ganzer R, 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[J]. Eur Urol, 2016, 70(2):301-311. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.01.026
[4]	Bessede T, Sooriakumaran P, Takenaka A, et al. Neural supply of the male urethral sphincter: Comprehensive anatomical review and implications for continence recovery after radical prostatectomy[J]. World J Urol, 2017, 35(4):549-565. doi: 10.1007/s00345-016-1901-8 pmid: 27484205
[5]	Mungovan SF, Sandhu JS, Akin O, et al. Preoperative membranous urethral length measurement and continence recovery following radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur Urol, 2017, 71(3):368-378. doi: S0302-2838(16)30341-4 pmid: 27394644
[6]	Song W, Kim CK, Park BK, et al. Impact of preoperative and postoperative membranous urethral length measured by 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging on urinary continence recovery after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy[J]. Can Urol Assoc J, 2017, 11(3/4):E93-E99.
[7]	Paparel P, Akin O, Sandhu JS, et al. Recovery of urinary continence after radical prostatectomy: Association with urethral length and urethral fibrosis measured by preoperative and postoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Eur Urol, 2009, 55(3):629-639. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.08.057
[8]	Myers RP, Cahill DR, Devine RM, et al. Anatomy of radical prostatectomy as defined by magnetic resonance imaging[J]. J Urol, 1998, 159(6):2148-2158. pmid: 9598561
[9]	Coakley FV, Eberhardt S, Kattan MW, et al. Urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy: Relationship with membranous urethral length on preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging[J]. J Urol, 2002, 168(3):1032-1035. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000025881.75827.a5 pmid: 12187216
[10]	Vordermark D. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors[J]. N Engl J Med, 2008, 359(2):200-202. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc080867
[11]	Mohler JL, Antonarakis ES, Armstrong AJ, et al. Prostate can-cer, version 2. 2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in onco-logy[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2019, 17(5):479-505. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0023
[12]	张帆, 马潞林, 黄毅, 等. 腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术后控尿功能恢复与术前膜性尿道长度的相关性研究[J]. 中华泌尿外科杂志, 2013, 34(1):41-44.
[13]	Nguyen L, Jhaveri J, Tewari A. Surgical technique to overcome anatomical shortcoming: Balancing post-prostatectomy continence outcomes of urethral sphincter lengths on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging[J]. J Urol, 2008, 179(5):1907-1911. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.036 pmid: 18353395
[14]	Kadono Y, Nohara T, Kawaguchi S, et al. Investigating the me-chanism underlying urinary continence recovery after radical prostatectomy: Effectiveness of a longer urethral stump to prevent urinary incontinence[J]. BJU Int, 2018, 122(3):456-462. doi: 10.1111/bju.14181
[15]	张帆, 肖春雷, 张树栋, 等. 前列腺体积及前列腺突入膀胱长度与腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术后控尿功能恢复的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2018, 50(4):621-625.
[16]	Lee H, Kim K, Hwang SI, et al. Impact of prostatic apical shape and protrusion on early recovery of continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy[J]. Urology, 2014, 84(4):844-849. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.06.011
[17]	Sauer M, Tennstedt P, Berliner C, et al. Predictors of short and long term urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy in prostate MRI: Significance and reliability of standardized measurements[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2019, 120:108668. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108668
[18]	Kim M, Park M, Pak S, et al. Integrity of the urethral sphincter complex, nerve-sparing, and long-term continence status after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy[J]. Eur Urol Focus, 2019, 5(5):823-830.

相关文章 15

[1]	王书磊,高阳旭,张宏武,杨海波,李辉,李宇,沈笠雪,姚红新. 儿童基底节区生殖细胞瘤30例临床分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(2): 222-226.
[2]	吴一凡,张晓圆,任爽,玉应香,常翠青. 基于磁共振的青年男性股四头肌的测量和评估[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 843-849.
[3]	张帆,黄晓娟,杨斌,颜野,刘承,张树栋,黄毅,马潞林. 前列腺尖部深度与腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术后早期控尿功能恢复的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(4): 692-696.
[4]	郝瀚,刘越,陈宇珂,司龙妹,张萌,范宇,张中元,唐琦,张雷,吴士良,宋毅,林健,赵峥,谌诚,虞巍,韩文科. 机器人辅助前列腺癌根治术后患者的控尿恢复时间[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(4): 697-703.
[5]	盛荟,梁磊,周童亮,贾彦兴,王彤,袁兰,韩鸿宾. 光磁双模态探针钆-[4,7-双-羧甲基-10-(2-荧光素硫脲乙基)-1,4,7,10-四氮杂环十二烷-1-基]-乙酸络合物合成方法的改进[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(5): 959-963.
[6]	赵世明,杨铁军,许春苗,郭孝峰,马永康,陈学军,李祥,何朝宏. 3.0T磁共振成像在接受过经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术膀胱癌中诊断肌层浸润的应用[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(4): 701-704.
[7]	宋宇,韩鸿宾,杨军,王艾博,和清源,李媛媛,赵国梅,高亚娟,王睿,韩易兴,刘爱连,宋清伟. 脑对流增强给药对老年大鼠脑细胞外间隙微观结构的影响[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(2): 362-367.
[8]	赵海岳,叶雄俊,陈伟男,安立哲,刘军,熊六林,黄晓波. 腹腔镜肾盂成型术中异位血管的处理方法[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(4): 660-664.
[9]	车新艳,吴士良,陈宇珂,黄燕波,杨洋. 女性医务人员尿失禁及其对生活质量影响的现况调查[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(4): 706-710.
[10]	吴静云,米悦,刘水,姚林,唐琦,何志嵩,王霄英. MRI对肾细胞癌静脉瘤栓侵犯下腔静脉壁的术前评估[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(4): 673-677.
[11]	黄海文,闫兵,尚美霞,刘漓波,郝瀚,席志军. 女性膀胱癌患者腹腔镜膀胱全切术与开放膀胱全切术的倾向性评分匹配比较[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(4): 698-705.
[12]	刘献辉,张维宇,胡浩,王起,王涛,贺永新,许克新. 耻骨后和经闭孔尿道中段悬吊术对不同分型压力性尿失禁疗效的长期随访[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(4): 694-697.
[13]	许力,胡明洁,李玉玉,屈洪党,钱伟东,刘晓林. 圆锥马尾部黏液乳头型室管膜瘤继发中枢神经系统表面铁沉积症1例报道及文献复习[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(4): 769-774.
[14]	王伟,侯进,黄文强. 运动导致兴奋脑区组织液流动一过性加速[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(2): 206-209.
[15]	张铃福,侯纯升,黄永辉,徐智,王立新,凌晓锋,王港,崔龙,修典荣. 胃空肠吻合术后胆总管结石腹腔镜手术取石和内镜取石的比较[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2019, 51(2): 345-348.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Items	Continence (n=40)	Incontinence (n=29)	χ²	P
Age			0.002	0.964
≥70 years	26	19
<70 years	14	10
BMI			0.451	0.502
≥22 kg/m²	32	25
<22 kg/m²	8	4
PSA before biopsy			2.112	0.348
<10 μg/L	15	9
10-20 μg/L	15	8
>20 μg/L	10	12
Biopsy Gleason score			1.963	0.375
6	8	4
7	14	7
≥8	18	18
Clinical stage			0.000	0.989
T1/T2	22	16
T3	18	13
Prostatic volume			4.804	0.028
<50 mL	33	17
≥50 mL	7	12
Preoperative MUL			12.647	<0.001
≥14 mm	27	7
<14 mm	13	22
Postoperative MUL			21.348	<0.001
≥13 mm	32	7
<13 mm	8	22

Items	B	S.E.	Walds	df	P	Exp(B)
PV	-0.383	0.675	0.322	1	0.571	0.682
Preoperative MUL	0.391	1.144	0.117	1	0.733	1.478
Postoperative MUL	-2.741	1.157	5.616	1	0.018	0.064
Constant	1.522	0.454	11.252	1	0.001	4.582