Radical retropubic prostatectomy: Bladder neck preservation versus reconstruction

Purpose: We compare bladder neck contracture, urinary continence and positive surgical margin rates after bladder neck preservation and excision with radical retropubic prostatectomy, Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of clinical and pathological findings, and followup of 220 patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy was performed. Patients were divided into 3 groups of bladder neck preservation (101), "tennis racket" reconstruction (63) and anterior bladder tube reconstruction (56), Results: Mean followup was 19.7, 36.7 and 16.2 months, respectively, for bladder neck preservation, tennis racket reconstruction and anterior bladder tube reconstruction, Overall, bladder neck contracture occurred in 22 of 220 cases (10%), including 5 of 101 (5%) with bladder neck preservation, 7 of 63 (11%) with tennis racket reconstruction and 10 of 56 (18%) with anterior bladder tube reconstruction, which approached statistical significance (p = 0.061). Urinary continence was assessed by a third party telephone interview of 165 patients. Continence rates at 1 year were 93% for bladder neck preservation, 96% for tennis racket reconstruction and 97% for anterior bladder tube reconstruction, which was not statistically significant (p = 0.68). Positive margin rates were 27.4% with bladder neck preservation versus 30.5% with excision, which was not significantly different. Conclusions: There are no statistically significant differences in return of urinary continence, bladder neck contracture rates or positive margins between bladder neck preservation and excision.