New Urethral Reconstruction in Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Resection
Comparison of New Reconstruction and Anastomosis in Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Resection: a Prospective Randomized Controlled Study
1 other identifier
interventional
94
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The purpose of this clinical trial is to compare new reconstruction and anastomosis in robot-assisted radical laparoscopic resection It will also understand the possibility of exploring new reconstruction in completely solving patients' postoperative urinary incontinence The main questions it aims to answer are: Is there a significant improvement in urinary control in patients with new reconstruction compared with patients with anastomosis? The researchers compared the new reconstruction with anastomosis in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical resection to see if the new reconstruction improved urinary incontinence after operation. Participants will: The intervention group adopted the new reconstruction proposed by our team; End-to-end anastomosis was performed in non-intervention group.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable prostate-cancer
Started Feb 2023
Typical duration for not_applicable prostate-cancer
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
February 5, 2023
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
March 31, 2024
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
April 9, 2024
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
June 1, 2026
ExpectedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
June 1, 2026
April 9, 2024
September 1, 2023
3.3 years
March 31, 2024
April 6, 2024
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Recovery of urinary incontinence
Recovery of urinary incontinence in intervention group and non-intervention group at the first time of catheter extubation, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after catheter extubation
at the first time of catheter extubation, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after catheter extubation
Secondary Outcomes (3)
complication
at the first time of catheter extubation, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after catheter extubation
PSA
at the first time of catheter extubation, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after catheter extubation
recurrence
at the first time of catheter extubation, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after catheter extubation
Study Arms (2)
New urethral reconstruction arm
EXPERIMENTALThe experimental group received a new reconstruction technique, in which the levator anus and the dorsal median ridge (MDR) of the lateral striated muscle were sutured to the Dirichlet fascia for continuous suture before anastomosis
Traditional bladder urethral anastomosis arm
ACTIVE COMPARATOREnd to end anastomosis of bladder and urethra
Interventions
This kind of reconstruction suture has larger area, higher firmness, better fixation of the position of broken end and prolongation of functional length.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Age ≥ 18 years old, confirmed by puncture pathology as prostate cancer
- The tumor has no extensive distant metastasis, or has reached a resectable state through neoadjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy
- Willing to accept robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
You may not qualify if:
- Tumor metastasis cannot achieve curative effect through surgery
- Concomitant severe cardiovascular and cerebrovascular complications
- Merge severe mental and neurological disorders
- Poor liver and kidney function
- Refusal to accept robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Qilu hospital
Jinan, Shandong, 276600, China
Related Publications (7)
Ficarra V, Rossanese M, Crestani A, Alario G, Mucciardi G, Isgro A, Giannarini G. Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using the Novel Urethral Fixation Technique Versus Standard Vesicourethral Anastomosis. Eur Urol. 2021 Apr;79(4):530-536. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.01.028. Epub 2021 Feb 4.
PMID: 33551295BACKGROUNDCui J, Guo H, Li Y, Chen S, Zhu Y, Wang S, Wang Y, Liu X, Wang W, Han J, Chen P, Nie S, Yin G, Shi B. Pelvic Floor Reconstruction After Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Different Surgical Techniques. Sci Rep. 2017 Jun 2;7(1):2737. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-02991-8.
PMID: 28578433BACKGROUNDRocco B, Gregori A, Stener S, Santoro L, Bozzola A, Galli S, Knez R, Scieri F, Scaburri A, Gaboardi F. Posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter allows a rapid recovery of continence after transperitoneal videolaparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2007 Apr;51(4):996-1003. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.014. Epub 2006 Oct 23.
PMID: 17079070BACKGROUNDSanda MG, Dunn RL, Michalski J, Sandler HM, Northouse L, Hembroff L, Lin X, Greenfield TK, Litwin MS, Saigal CS, Mahadevan A, Klein E, Kibel A, Pisters LL, Kuban D, Kaplan I, Wood D, Ciezki J, Shah N, Wei JT. Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors. N Engl J Med. 2008 Mar 20;358(12):1250-61. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa074311.
PMID: 18354103BACKGROUNDMungovan SF, Carlsson SV, Gass GC, Graham PL, Sandhu JS, Akin O, Scardino PT, Eastham JA, Patel MI. Preoperative exercise interventions to optimize continence outcomes following radical prostatectomy. Nat Rev Urol. 2021 May;18(5):259-281. doi: 10.1038/s41585-021-00445-5. Epub 2021 Apr 8.
PMID: 33833445BACKGROUNDMoore K, Allen M, Voaklander DC. Pad tests and self-reports of continence in men awaiting radical prostatectomy: establishing baseline norms for males. Neurourol Urodyn. 2004;23(7):623-6. doi: 10.1002/nau.20067.
PMID: 15382185RESULTQi W, Dou M, Xu L, Qu S, Zhu Y, Chen S, Shi B. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using a novel urethral reconstruction technique vs standard vesicourethral anastomosis. A retrospective cohort study. World J Urol. 2023 Jan;41(1):51-58. doi: 10.1007/s00345-022-04208-8. Epub 2022 Nov 24.
PMID: 36434138RESULT
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- STUDY CHAIR
Shouzhen Chen, Dr.
Qilu Hospital of Shandong University
Central Study Contacts
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT
- Masking Details
- Patients in the experimental or control group, as well as their family members, are unaware
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
March 31, 2024
First Posted
April 9, 2024
Study Start
February 5, 2023
Primary Completion (Estimated)
June 1, 2026
Study Completion (Estimated)
June 1, 2026
Last Updated
April 9, 2024
Record last verified: 2023-09