PURPOSE:To review, compare, and contrast recovery of potency after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with specific regard to thermal and excisional nerve injury. Our goal was to compare intensity of injury and ability to recover potency in order to stratify risk by injury type. METHODS:We compare potency outcomes in our first 500 consecutive cases of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. This is a retrospective review of data collected prospectively into an electronic database. Preoperative inclusion criteria were age less than 66 years, International Index of Erectile Function Score of 22-25, and unilateral or bilateral nerve preservation. Potency data were collected via patient-reported validated questionnaires. Potency was defined with two affirmative responses to: "erections hard enough for sexual intercourse" and were they "satisfactory." Results were collated and graphically analyzed so that time-line comparisons of recovery could be evaluated. RESULTS:Time-line curves were generated comparing recovery of sexual function over 2 years after nervesparing techniques using cautery versus cautery-free and unilateral versus bilateral nerve preservation. Use of no cautery improved early return of sexual function 4.7-fold over cautery. Whether using cautery or cautery-free techniques, a doubling of nerve tissue from one nerve to two nerves spared only resulted in a 1.2-fold improvement of potency recovery both early and long-term. CONCLUSIONS:In our experience, avoidance of thermal injury produces nearly a 5-fold improvement in early return of sexual function. Furthermore, thermal injury appears to induce a dense but largely recoverable injury after 2 years. In contrast to common belief, our results demonstrated that preservation of just one nerve will, in the majority of patients, result in similar potency recovery to that with two nerves preserved. Crossover innervation of the one nerve is favored over compensation and hints that techniques that increase nerve volume at the expense of positive surgical margins may need careful introspection.

译文

目的:回顾,比较和对比机器人辅助的根治性前列腺切除术在热和切除神经损伤方面的效能恢复。我们的目标是比较伤害强度和恢复能力的能力,以便按伤害类型对风险进行分层。
方法:我们比较了前500例机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的疗效。这是对前瞻性收集到电子数据库中的数据的回顾性审查。术前纳入标准为年龄小于66岁,国际勃起功能指数为22-25,以及单侧或双侧神经保存。通过患者报告的经过验证的问卷收集效能数据。对效能的定义是对以下两个肯定的回答:“足以进行性交的勃起”和“令人满意的勃起”。对结果进行整理和图形分析,以便可以评估恢复的时间线比较。
结果:绘制了时间线曲线,比较了在采用保留烧灼与无烧灼以及单侧保留与双侧保留神经的神经保护技术后两年内性功能的恢复情况。使用非烧灼术可以使性功能的早期恢复比烧灼术提高4.7倍。无论使用烧灼技术还是无烧灼技术,将神经组织从一只神经加倍到两条神经,仅能使早期和长期的效能恢复提高1.2倍。
结论:根据我们的经验,避免热损伤可使性功能的早期恢复提高近5倍。此外,热损伤似乎在2年后诱发了密集但可恢复的损伤。与普遍的看法相反,我们的结果表明,在大多数患者中,仅保留一条神经将导致与保留两条神经相似的效力恢复。一条神经的交叉神经支配优于补偿,这暗示以正的手术切缘为代价增加神经体积的技术可能需要仔细的内省。

+1
+2
100研值 100研值 ¥99课程
检索文献一次
下载文献一次

去下载>

成功解锁2个技能,为你点赞

《SCI写作十大必备语法》
解决你的SCI语法难题!

技能熟练度+1

视频课《玩转文献检索》
让你成为检索达人!

恭喜完成新手挑战

手机微信扫一扫,添加好友领取

免费领《Endnote文献管理工具+教程》

微信扫码, 免费领取

手机登录

获取验证码
登录