Videosurgery
Robotic reconstruction of vesico-urethral anastomosis stenosis: a descriptive technique and short-term results
Antonio Andrea Grosso, Fabrizio Di Maida, Luca Lambertini, Maria Lucia Gallo, Agostino Tuccio, Andrea Mari, Lorenzo Masieri, Andrea Minervini
Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence , Unit of Oncologic Minimally-invasive Urology and Andrology, Careggi Hospital, Florence, Italy
Citation: Grosso A A, Maida F D, Lambertini L, et al. Robotic reconstruction of vesico-urethral anastomosis stenosis: a descriptive technique and short-term results. www.ceju.online/journal/2022/uesicourethral-anastomosis-stenosis-prostatectomy-2207.php
Key Words: prostatectomy • reconstructive surgery • minimally invasive surgery • uesico-urethral anastomosis stenosis • robot-assisted surgery

Vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis (VUAS) represents a late complication following radical prostatectomy (RP). VUAS rate after open radical prostatectomy (RP) ranges between 3–15%, and considerably decreases to nearly 2% after robot-assisted RP. Endoscopic management of VUAS provides good results when the stricture has limited size, while in more complex cases open reconstructive surgery still remains the preferred treatment option. In this setting, robotic assistance represents the latest development in VUAS management although the number of published reports is still extremely limited. Aim of the present paper is to show robotic VUAS reconstruction, specifically focusing on technical details and perioperative outcomes.
In the accompanying video material we present a robotic VUAS reconstruction case in a 70-year old man treated with open RP in 2017. Patient was sent to our referral Institution due to recurrent stenosis (11 previous endoscopic interventions in the latest 21 months). The main surgical steps were the following: 1) Developing a posterior plane between the bladder neck and the rectum until reaching the pelvic floor musculature; 2) Recreating the space of Retzius carrying the dissection inferiorly beneath the pubic symphysis to the area of the bladder neck; 3) Opening the bladder anterior to the bladder neck and excising the scar tissue; 4) Freeing the bladder from the scar preserving as much of the healthy bladder neck as possible; 5) Performing the vesicourethral anastomosis following the standard principles.
Operative time was 115 minutes. No perioperative complications were recorded. At 12-month postoperative evaluation, patient did not experience recurrence.
To conclude, robotic management of VUAS after is a feasible treatment option with promising short-term functional results. Further evidence, including comparative studies with adequate number of patients and longer follow-up are warranted.

Article history
Submitted: 24 February, 2022
Accepted: 9 April, 2022
Published online: 14 April, 2022
doi: 10.5173/ceju.2022.0048
Corresponding author
Andrea Minervini
email: andrea.minervini@unifi.it
Conflicts of interest:  The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).
Current issue
Ahead of print
Issue: 2022
Vol. 75, No. 3 Vol. 75, No. 2 Vol. 75, No. 1
Issue: 2021
Vol. 74, No. 4 Vol. 74, No. 3 Vol. 74, No. 2 Vol. 74, No. 1
Issue: 2020
Vol. 73, No. 4 Vol. 73, No. 3 Vol. 73, No. 2 Vol. 73, No. 1
Issue: 2019
Vol. 72, No. 4 Vol. 72, No. 3 Vol. 72, No. 2 Vol. 72, No. 1
Issue: 2018
Vol. 71, No. 4 Vol. 71, No. 3 Vol. 71, No. 2 Vol. 71, No. 1
Issue: 2017
Vol. 70, No. 4 Vol. 70, No. 3 Vol. 70, No. 2 Vol. 70, No. 1
Issue: 2016
Vol. 69, No. 4 Vol. 69, No. 3 Vol. 69, No. 2 Vol. 69, No. 1
Issue: 2015
Vol. 68, No. 4 Vol. 68, No. 3 Vol. 68, No. 2 Vol. 68, No. 1
Issue: 2014
Vol. 67, No. 4 Vol. 67, No. 3 Vol. 67, No. 2 Vol. 67, No. 1
Issue: 2013
Vol. 66, No. 4 Vol. 66, No. 3 Vol. 66, No. 2 Vol. 66, No. 1
Issue: 2012
Vol. 65, No. 4 Vol. 65, No. 3 Vol. 65, No. 2 Vol. 65, No. 1
Issue: 2011
Vol. 64, No. 4 Vol. 64, No. 3 Vol. 64, No. 2 Vol. 64, No. 1
Issue: 2010
Vol. 63, No. 4 Vol. 63, No. 3 Vol. 63, No. 2 Vol. 63, No. 1
Issue: 2009
Vol. 62, No. 4 Vol. 62, No. 3 Vol. 62, No. 2 Vol. 62, No. 1
Loading...
Logo CEJU