Effect of autonomic nervous system resection extent on urinary dysfunction in robotic rectal cancer surgery

Sodai Arai,Hiroyasu Kagawa,Akio Shiomi,Yusuke Yamaoka,Shoichi Manabe,Chikara Maeda,Yusuke Tanaka,Shunsuke Kasai,Akifumi Notsu,Yusuke Kinugasa
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12878
2024-11-06
Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery
Abstract:In rectal cancer surgery, this study examined the risk factors for urinary dysfunction and the effect of autonomic nervous system resection extent on urinary dysfunction. Autonomic nervous system resection and lateral lymph node dissection were independent risk factors for urinary dysfunction. The extent of autonomic nervous system resection was associated with increased urinary dysfunction. Aim We investigated whether autonomic nervous system resection during robotic rectal surgery contributes to urinary dysfunction and to what extent. Methods This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent rectal surgery for primary rectal cancer between December 2011 and April 2021. We identified urinary dysfunction risk factors and examined the effect of autonomic nervous system resection extent on urinary dysfunction occurrence, with urinary dysfunction defined as a residual urine volume of >50 mL. Urinary dysfunction with no improvement over 1 y was defined as permanent urinary dysfunction. Results Of 1017 eligible patients, 78 (7.7%) required autonomic nervous system resection. Lateral lymph node dissection was performed in 357 patients (35.1%). Urinary dysfunction was observed in 102 patients (10.0%). We studied 32 (41.0%) of 78 patients who underwent autonomic nervous system resection and 82 (23.0%) of 357 patients who underwent lateral lymph node dissection presented with urinary dysfunction. Multivariate analysis revealed that lateral lymph node dissection and autonomic nervous system resection were significant predictors of urinary dysfunction. The urinary dysfunction incidence was notably higher in patients with autonomic nervous system unilateral total resection of at least one side than in those with bilateral preservation (65.4% vs. 28.8%, p
gastroenterology & hepatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?