Technical Innovations to Optimize Early Return of Urinary Continence

  • Usama Khater
  • Sanjay RazdanEmail author


Post-prostatectomy incontinence (PPI) represents a time-dependent devastating iatrogenic complication after surgery. A 12-month continence rate is reported in 48–91 % after laparoscopic prostatectomy (LP), in 89–97 % after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) and 77.7–93.7 % of cases after open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) [1]. Although the continence rate 1 year after RALP is excellent, achievement of an earlier continence at 3 and 6 months postoperatively is still a challenge. Several surgical techniques to optimize the early return of continence have been described. Most of these techniques emphasize the importance of restoring the normal pelvic anatomy after removal of the prostate.


Prostatectomy Robotic Optimizing Continence Urethral length Maximizing 

Supplementary material

Video 5.1

MULP technique for early return of continence (MP4 144756 kb)

Video 5.2

Optimizing continence with MULP and classic Van Velthoven anastomosis (MP4 121208 kb)


  1. 1.
    Park B, Kim W, Jeong BC, et al. Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes of pure versus robotic assisted radical prostatectomy performed by a single surgeon. Scand J Urol. 2013;47:10–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Golomb J, Chertin B, Mor Y. Anatomy of urinary continence and neurogenic incontinence. Therapy. 2009;6:151–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koraitim MM. The male urethral sphincter complex revisited: an anatomical concept and its physiological correlate. J Urol. 2008;179:1683–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Friedlander D, Alemozaffar M, Hevelon N, Lipsitz S, Hu J. Stepwise description and outcomes of bladder neck sparing during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2012;188:1754–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hollabaugh R, Dmochwski R, Kneib T, Steiner M. Preservation of putative continence nerves during radical retropubic prostatectomy leads to more rapid return of urinary incontinence. Urology. 1998;51:960–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Choi W, Freire M, Soukup J, Lipsitz S, Carvas F, Williams S, et al. Nerve sparing technique and urinary control after robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. World J Urol. 2011;29:21–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pick D, Osann K, Skarecky D, Narula N, Finley D, Ahlering T. The impact of cavernous nerve preservation on continence after robotic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2011;108:1492–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Avant O, Jones J, Beck H, Hunt C, Staub M. New method to improve treatment outcomes after radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2000;56:658–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stolzenburg J, Liastsikos E, Rabenalt R, Do M, Sakelaropoulos G, Horn L, et al. Nerve sparing endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy – effect of puboprostatic ligament preservation on early continence and positive margins. Eur Urol. 2006;49:103–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Asimakopoulos A, Annino F, D’Orazio A, Pereira R. Complete periprostatic anatomy preservation during robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP): the new pubovesical complex sparing technique. Eur Urol. 2010;58:407–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hakimi A, Faleck D, Agalliu I, Rozenblit A, Chrnyak V, Ghavaamian R. Preoperative and intraoperative measurements of urethral length as predictors of continence after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2011;25:1025–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van Randenborgh H, Paul R, Kubler H, Breul J, Hartung R. Improved urinary continence after radical prostatectomy with preparation of a long partially portion of the membranous urethra: analysis of 1013 consecutive cases. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2004;7:253–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nguyen L, Jhaveri J, Twari A. Surgical technique to overcome anatomical shortcoming: balancing post-prostatectomy continence outcomes of urethral sphincter lengths on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol. 2008;179:1907–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hamada A, Razdan S, Etafy M, Fagin R, Razdan S. Early return of continence in patients undergoing robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy using modified maximal urethral length preservation technique. J Endourol. 2014;28:930–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tewari A, Jhaveri J, Rao S, Yadav R, Bartsch G, Te A, et al. Total reconstruction of vesicourethral junction. BJU Int. 2008;101:871–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rocco F, Rocco B. Anatomical reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2009;104:274–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rocco F, Carmignan L, Acquati P, Gadda F, Dell’Orto P, Rocco B, et al. Restoration of posterior aspect of rhabdosphincter shortens continence time after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2006;175:2201–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rocco F, Carmignani L, Acquati P, Gadda F, Dell’Orto P, Rocco B, et al. Early continence recovery after open radical prostatectomy with restoration of the posterior aspect of the rhabdosphincter. Eur Urol. 2007;52:376–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nguyen M, Kamoi K, Stein R, Aron M, Hafron J, Turna B, et al. Early continence outcomes of posterior musculofascial plate reconstruction during robotic and laparoscopic prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2008;101:1135–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Brien J, Barone B, Fabrizio M, Given R. Posterior reconstruction before vesicourethral anastomosis in patients undergoing robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy leads to earlier return to baseline continence. J Endourol. 2011;25:441–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gondo T, Yoshika K, Hashimoto T, Nakagami Y, Hamada R, Kashima T, et al. The powerful impact of double-layered posterior rhabdosphincter reconstruction on early recovery of urinary continence after robot assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2012;26:1159–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ficarra V, Gan M, Borghesi M, Zattoni F, Mottrie A. Posterior muscolofascial reconstruction incorporated into urethrovesical anastomosis during robot assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2012;26:1542–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Menon M, Muhletaler F, Campos M, Peabody J. Assessment of early continence after reconstruction of periprostatic tissues in patient undergoing computer assisted (robotic) prostatectomy: results of a 2 groups parallel randomized controlled trial. J Urol. 2008;180:1018–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hurtes X, Rouret M, Vaessen C, Perreira H, Faiver d’Arcier B, Cormier L, et al. Anterior suspension combined with posterior reconstruction during robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy improves early return of urinary incontinence: a prospective randomized multicenter trial. BJU Int. 2012;110:875–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Patel V, Coelho R, Palmer K, Rocco B. Periurethral suspension stitch during robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the technique and continence outcomes. Eur Urol. 2009;56:472–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee D, Wedmid A, Mendoza P, Sharma S, Walicki M, Hastings R, et al. Bladder neck Plication stitch: a novel technique during robot assisted radical prostatectomy to improve recovery of urinary incontinence. J Endourol. 2011;25:1873–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kojima Y, Hamakawa T, Kubota Y, Ogawa S, Haga N, Tozawa K, et al. Bladder neck sling suspension during robot assisted radical prostatectomy to improve early return of urinary continence: a comparative analysis. Urology. 2014;83:632–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Robotic Prostatectomy InstituteUrology Center of Excellence at Jackson South HospitalMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations