M. Srougi et al., Urinary continence and pathological outcome after bladder neck preservation during radical retropubic prostatectomy: A randomized prospective trial, J UROL, 165(3), 2001, pp. 815-818
Purpose: Bladder neck preservation during radical prostatectomy has been ad
vocated for improving urinary continence. We compared bladder neck preserva
tion and resection in a randomized trial, looking at continence rates and s
urgical cancer control.
Materials and Methods: Patients with stage T1c-T2c prostate cancer underwen
t radical retropubic prostatectomy with maximal preservation of the externa
l urinary sphincter. Bladder neck preservation or resection was chosen by c
hance during surgery. Urinary continence (1 or no protective pad daily) was
assessed by interview 2 days after catheter removal, and 2 and 6 months af
ter surgery. The surgeon, pathologist and interviewer were the same through
out. Neither patient nor interviewer knew which procedure was done. Planned
enrollment was 120.
Results: Enrollment was stopped after 70 patients because surgical margins
were positive only at the bladder neck in 10% of the preservation group but
in none of the resection group (p = 0.08). Each group was assigned 35 pati
ents but the bladder neck could not be preserved in 4 and 1 died, leaving 3
1 in the preservation group and 38 in the resection group. There were no st
atistically significant differences between groups in early or late urinary
continence rates. Two days after catheter removal, and 2 and 6 months afte
r surgery the respective rates were 79%, 87% and 95% with resection, and 67
%, 87% and 97% with preservation.
Conclusions: In our opinion bladder neck preservation during radical retrop
ubic prostatectomy does not improve urinary continence and might compromise
cancer control. The external sphincter appears more important for continen
ce after radical prostatectomy.