Examining the ‘gold standard’: a comparative critical analysis of three consecutive decades of monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) outcomes

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the dominant and definitive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS‐BPH), but the widespread use of medical therapies (particularly monotherapies) for rapid symptom improvement has meant that the most common indication for TURP has shifted to moderate–severe medical therapy refractory LUTS to, coupled with abnormal objective parameters, or when complications arise. Patients undergoing TURP as part of contemporary randomised controlled trials are not older but have a larger preoperative prostate volume and reduced major morbidity compared with large cohort studies from successive past eras. Delayed surgery because of prolonged medical monotherapy may explain a higher reported failure to void rate, possibly because of negative impact on detrusor function from unrelieved obstruction. This study examined contemporary TURP for significant changes, specifically regarding prostate size, operative parameters, and outcomes, compared with two preceding decades. Electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE & Cochrane collaboration were searched for English literature on prospective randomized controlled trials, published between 1997 and 2007 using keywords “transurethral resection” and “prostate”. Monopolar TURP (M‐TURP) cohort data of each study were selectively pooled for analysis, weighting studies according to patient numbers. Where possible, pooled post‐operative outcomes data were compared with two large cohort landmark studies of successive preceding decades. A total of 3470 patients from 67 studies were included. Mean patient age (67 years) was unchanged, while mean pre‐operative prostate volume of 47.6 g was greater than previously reported. Mean resected prostate tissue (25.8 g) with a resection time of 38.5 minutes suggested improved resection efficiency. A statistically significantly reduced transfusion rate and increased urinary tract infection (UTI) rate were reported. Hospital stay (3.6 days) and initial catheterisation duration (2.5 days) were similar, but post‐operative urinary retention rate was slightly higher (6.8%). Contemporary RCTs of M‐TURP showed larger prostate volume, and reduced major morbidity, compared with large cohort studies from successive past eras. The higher reported failure to void rate, may possibly reflect worse detrusor function at time of TURP. Delaying surgery by prolonged medical monotherapy may compound this. Trials methodology in this area requires quality improvement and standardisation in future.     

Thick loop prostatectomy in the endoscopic treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of a prospective randomised study

OBJECTIVE: The thick loop is a new device employed for transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) using the standard resectoscope. The loop is broader and thicker than the standard one, resulting in better hemostasis because of its ability to cut, coagulate and vaporize tissue simultaneously. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the thick loop device compared with the standard loop. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 103 patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to undergo either thick loop (51 patients) or standard loop TURP (52 patients). Patients were considered for surgery with the American Urological Association (AUA) symptom score greater than 7 and a maximum urinary flow rate <15 ml/s. Serum hemoglobin, hematocrit, electrolytes, operative time, prostate resected weight, catheterization time and complications were recorded. Twelve months later, the AUA score, maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)) and postvoiding residual urine volume were evaluated. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between thick and standard loop TURP regarding the operative and catheterization time, prostate resection weight and postoperative levels of hemoglobin, hematocrit and electrolytes. Twelve months after TURP, the AUA score was significantly lower and Q(max) greater in the thick loop compared to the standard loop groups. CONCLUSIONS: Thick loop TURP is as safe as standard loop TURP with respect to blood loss, operative time and complications. Operating in a virtually bloodless field could allow a more radical TURP and provide an explanation for the better functional results (Q(max) and AUA score) obtained by the thick loop resection.     

经尿道前列腺汽化切割术与电切术的比较

目的 比较经尿道前列腺汽化切割术(TUVP)和经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)对良性前列腺增生(BPH)的治疗效果。方法 有症状的BPH患者100例,分成TUVP组50例,TURP组50例。结果 TUVP组与TURP组术前与术后前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、最大尿流率(MFR)、剩余尿(PVR)比较有显著差异(P<0.01),两组间比较无显著性差异(P>0.05)。术后血红蛋白、血细胞比积和血钠两组比较有显著性差异(P<0.05)。手术时间和前列腺切除体质量两组比较无显著性差异(P>0.05)。TUVP组继发出血1例(2.0％),尿道外口狭窄1例(2.0％),阳痿4例(8.0％),尿路刺激症状7例(14.0％),无尿失禁及TRUS发生。TURP组继发出血2例(4.0％),尿道外口狭窄1例(2.0％),阳痿5例(10.0％),TRUS出现1例(2.0％)尿路刺激症状6例(12.0%),无尿失禁发生。结论 TUVP治疗效果确切,达到与TURP完全相同的效果,术中出血明显少于TURP,无TURS发生,是最具潜力的新技术。     

Transurethral incision versus transurethral resection of the prostate. A subjective and objective analysis.

A prospective study was undertaken comparing transurethral incision of the prostate (TUIP) with transurethral resection (TURP) in the treatment of 220 patients with urinary obstruction caused by a small, benign prostate. Patients were managed alternately by TUIP and TURP, and their symptoms and urodynamic findings evaluated before and after surgery. Subjectively and objectively, the results were comparable in both groups. Pre- and post-operative complications were significantly less for the TUIPs than the TURPs. TUIP was significantly better than TURP in terms of shorter operating time, duration of hospitalisation and reduced need for transfusion. We recommend TUIP as the operation of choice for the relief of obstruction in the presence of a small, benign prostatic enlargement.     

Seeking evidence that cell kill guided thermotherapy gives results not inferior to those of transurethral prostate resection: results of a pooled analysis of 3 studies of feedback transurethral microwave thermotherapy

PURPOSE: We compared ProstaLund Feedback Treatment (PLFT) to transurethral prostate resection (TURP) in terms of efficacy and safety in a pooled analysis of 3 clinical studies with 1-year followup. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall raw data on 183 patients with PLFT and 65 with TURP were pooled. All studies had identical inclusion criteria, and the efficacy and safety of the method were evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum urine flow (Qmax), responder rate, bother score, prostate volume reduction and adverse events. RESULTS: The response rate was 85.3% and 85.9% in the PLFT and TURP groups, respectively. One-sided 95% CI analysis showed the noninferiority of PLFT vs TURP for this variable. Mean International Prostate Symptom Score was significantly decreased in the PLFT and TURP groups after 12 months (from 20.9 to 6.4 and 20.7 to 7.1, respectively). The 1-sided upper 95% CI of PLFT was within the noninferiority definition compared with that of TURP. The bother score decrease in the PLFT and TURP groups was not significant different (70.9% and 64.0%, respectively). An increase in Qmax from 7.7 to 16.1 ml per second 12 months after PLFT was noted, while the improvement in Qmax in the TURP group was higher (from 7.5 to 18.6 ml per second). The 1-sided lower 95% CI was close (0.76) but it did not attain the predetermined level of noninferiority (0.80). Mean transurethral ultrasound determined volume 12 months after PLFT and TURP was reduced by 32.8% and 58.1%, respectively. A significant correlation between the transurethral ultrasound determined prostate volume reduction and estimated cell kill was found (r = 0.456, p <0.000001). Serious adverse events with causality occurred in 15.4% of patients with TURP compared with 6.0% in those with PLFT (p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Combined experience from our pooled analysis indicates that PLFT challenges TURP in terms of efficacy and safety after 1 year of followup.     

五分法经尿道前列腺电切术治疗高危重度前列腺增生(附102例报告)

目的探讨经尿道前列腺五分法电切术治疗高龄、高危、重度前列腺增生患者的安全性与疗效。方法高龄高危重度BPH102例，采用前列腺五分法TURP治疗68例，常规法TURP治疗34例，对两组病例的手术时间、切除增生腺体重量、术中出血量、术中输血量、手术前后Qmax、RUV、IPSS、QOL及近期手术并发症发生率等进行比较。结果两组手术均获得成功;与常规法TURP组相比较，五分法TURP组的平均手术时间、术中出血量及输血量明显缩短或减少，而且切除腺体重量较多、近期手术并发症发生率较低，差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。术后3个月，五分法组与常规法组Qmax、RUV、IPSS及QOL较术前明显改善（P〈0.05），但组间无显著性差异（P〉0.05）。结论前列腺五分法TURP治疗高龄、高危、重度BPH患者与常规法TURP相比较具有手术时间短、切除增生腺体组织多、术中出血及手术并发症少等，提高了手术的安全疗效。     

Bladder neck incision or transurethral electroresection for the treatment of urinary obstruction caused by a small benign prostate? A randomized urodynamic study

Transurethral electroresection of the prostate (TURP) was compared with bladder neck incision (BNI) in the treatment of 24 patients with urinary obstruction caused by a small benign prostate. An evaluation of the urodynamic findings and subjective symptoms was undertaken before the operation and 6 months afterwards. Thirteen patients underwent TURP and 11 BNI. All patients except one in the BNI group subjectively considered the result good. The urodynamic evaluation showed that the detrusor pressure at maximum flow rate decreased more in the TURP group than in the BNI group and the urethral pressure profile was shorter after the operation. The maximum flow rates after the operation were similar in both groups. Retrograde ejaculation developed in 62% of the patients after TURP but none after BNI. BNI is recommended for men under 60 years with minimal prostatic hypertrophy and with an active sexual life.     

Outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in men with previous transurethral resection of prostate

Study Type – Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4

OBJECTIVE

? To critically analyze and compare surgical, oncological and functional outcomes of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in patients with and without previous transurethral resection of prostate (TURP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

? The study comprised 158 cases of RARP for clinically localized prostate cancer, including 26 cases that had undergone previous TURP (Group A). ? Surgical, oncological and functional (short‐ and intermediate‐term) outcomes of Group A were compared with 132 cases without previous TURP (Group B).

RESULTS

? Post TURP patients were found to have significantly greater blood loss (494 vs 324 mL) and a need for bladder neck reconstruction (26.7% vs 9.7%) compared to the non‐TURP group. ? Surgical time (189 vs 166 min), conversion rate, margin positivity rate and biochemical recurrence rate were also higher. ? Incontinence rates were higher both at 6 (14% vs 11.8%) and 12 (25% vs 8%) months follow‐up.

CONCLUSIONS

? RARP is feasible but challenging after TURP. It entails a longer operating time, greater operative difficulty and compromised oncological or continence outcomes. ? These cases should be handled by an experienced robotic surgeon with the appropriate expertise.     

Interstitial laser coagulation treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: is it to be recommended?

PURPOSE: To update the clinical data on the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) by interstitial laser coagulation (ILC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In addition to recent review articles, original papers published during the last 2 years were surveyed. The focus was on prospective, particularly randomized, trials and on those with long-term follow-up. RESULTS: Interstitial laser coagulation is feasible, although considerable variability is observed in the results. Operative complications are minimal, but the postoperative catheterization time is relatively long. Irritative symptoms can last for a long time, and the rate of urinary infections is as high as 35%. There also is significant variability in the urodynamic results. The technique seems to be more effective in patients with mild bladder outlet obstruction at baseline. The retreatment rate at 1 year is as high as 15%, and higher rates, as much as 40%, are described at 3 years. When compared in a randomized fashion with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), the postoperative period is shorter after TURP and the retreatment rate (early and late) is higher after ILC. CONCLUSIONS: Interstitial laser coagulation is superior to TURP in terms of operative morbidity, but postoperative morbidity is higher after ILC. Long-term durability has not been properly documented, and randomized studies show a higher retreatment rate after ILC than after TURP. The technique is recommended for those patients with bleeding disorders necessitating an interventional therapy.     

Transurethral incision of the prostate and bladder neck for the treatment of outflow obstruction caused by a small benign prostate]

Transurethral incision of the prostate and bladder neck (TIPBn) was compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) followed by bladder neck incision in the treatment of 22 patients with outflow obstruction caused by a small prostate adenoma (below 15 gm). Eleven patients underwent TIPBn and another 11 TURP. An evaluation of the urodynamic findings and subjective symptoms was undertaken before the operation and 3 months afterwards. Urodynamic findings were evaluated, based upon uroflowmetry, i.e., in terms of maximum flow rate, average flow rate, voiding time, initiation time and residual rate. All patients in the TIPBn group revealed an improvement in every urodynamic parameter (MFR: from 6.1 to 10.8 ml/sec, AFR: from 3.1 to 5.8 ml/sec, Voiding time: from 95.5 to 24.2 sec/100 ml, Initiation time: 34.3 to 10.2 sec, Residual rate: 31.6 to 17.8%, in mean value). Ten out of the 11 in the TIPBn group subjectively considered the result to be good. The improvements in the urodynamic parameters in the TIPBn group were statistically comparable to those in the TURP. The improvements in voiding time and initiation time, however, tended to be much better in the TIPBn group. We conclude that TIPBn can be the operation of choice in the treatment of outflow obstruction caused by a small prostate.     

KTP laser versus transurethral resection: early results of a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Many technologies have been mooted as equal to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) without gaining widespread acceptance because of the lack of randomized trials. The Greenlight laser system (Laserscope, San Jose, Ca.), an 80 W system for photovaporization of the prostate (PVP), was compared with TURP in such a trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A series of 120 patients was randomized to undergo TURP or PVP after evaluation, which was repeated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment. Irrigation use, length of catherization (LOC), length of hospital stay (LOS), postvoiding residual volume, sexual function, blood loss, cost, and operative time also were assessed. RESULTS: To date, 76 patients are evaluable. Both groups showed a significant (P < 0.5) increase in maximum flow rate from baseline. In the TURP group, flow increased from 8.7 to 17.9 mL/sec (149%) and in the PVP group from 8.5 to 20.6 mL/sec (167%). The International Prostate Symptom Score decreased from 25.4 to 12.4(50.23%) in the TURP group and from 25.7 to 12.0 (49.83%) in the PVP group. Postvoiding residual volumes also showed significant decreases. Similar trends were seen in relation to bother and quality of life scores. There was no difference in sexual function as measured by a questionnaire. The LOC was significantly less in the PVP group (P < 0.001), the mean being 12.2 hours (range 0-24 hours) versus 44.5 hours for TURP (range 6-192 hours). A similar situation was seen in relation to LOS (P < 0.0001), with the mean of the PVP group being 1.08 days (range 1-2 days) and the mean for the TURP group being 3.4 days (range 3-9 days). Adverse events were less frequent in the PVP group, and the costs were 22% less. CONCLUSIONS: This trial demonstrates that PVP is effective compared with TURP, producing equivalent improvements in flow rates and IPSS with markedly reduced LOS, LOC, and adverse events. Long-term follow- up is being undertaken to assess the durability of these results.     

经尿道前列腺剜除术与电切术疗效比较

目的:探讨普通电切镜下经尿道前列腺剜除术与电切术的疗效.方法:对75例前列腺生患者行经尿道前列腺剜除术治疗(TUEP组),110例经尿道前列腺电切术治疗(TURP组).结果:TUEP组术中出血量(前列腺重量<0 g)、手术时间均明显少于TURP组(P<0.05),增生腺体切除重量明显高于TURP组(P<0.05).术后12个月,最大尿流率、国际前列腺症状评分,生活质量评分等组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论:TUEP术与TURP术相比较,TUEP手术安全性更好,术中出血量少(前列腺重量<0 g)手术时间快、切除增生腺体更彻底.     

Visual Laser Ablation of the Prostate and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

For the past 50 years, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has been the most common treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The authors have conducted visual laser ablation of the prostate (VLAP) for BPH as a minimum invasive surgery. The results were compared with those of VLAP, VLAP+transurethral incision of the prostate (TUIP), and TURP as other treatments for BPH. In the VLAP group, 50 of 52 (96.2%), 36 of 40 (90.0%) and 31 of 36 (86.1%) were categorized as having more than a Fair Response (FR) at 3, 6 and 12 months, postoperatively. In the VLAP+TUIP group, 24 of 29 (82.8%), 19 of 22 (86.4%) and 9 of 11 (81.8%) were classed as having more than a FR at 3, 6 and 1 2 months, postoperatively. Forty–one of 42 (97.6%), 1 7 of 1 7 (100.0%) and 6 of 6 (100.0%) patients reaction to TURP was more than FR in overall response at 3, 6 and 12 months, postoperatively. The need for a blood transfusion, perforation of the prostate capsule and transit incontinence persisting for more than 1 month occurred in 1 of 45 (2.2%), 1 (2.2%) and 4 (8.9%) patients in the TURP group. Bladder neck contracture was seen in 4 of 52 (7.7%) in the VLAP group. Average postoperative catheter duration was shorter in the VLAP+TUIP (5.7 ± 8.4 days) than in the VLAP group (10.3 ± 10.4 days). Although TURP remains the standard treatment for BPH, VLAP results in less morbidity compared to TURP. VLAP with TUIP appears to lessen the risk of postoperative urinary retention and provide better results in longer follow–up studies.     

Transurethral incision versus transurethral resection of the prostate in small prostatic adenoma: Long-term follow-up

ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of transurethral incision of the prostate (TUIP) compared to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients with small benign prostate adenoma, based on long-term follow-up.Patients and methodsWe prospectively randomized 86 men with bladder outlet obstruction symptoms caused by a prostate less than 30 g to undergo TUIP or TURP. The following preoperative parameters were evaluated: prostate weight, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), voided volume, maximum flow rate (Qmax) and post-void residual volume (PVR). Postoperatively the patients were followed up for 48 months and the following data were collected: morbidity, operative time, catheterization period, hospital stay, Qmax, IPSS, voided volume, PVR and reoperation rate.ResultsA total of 80 of the 86 patients completed the study: 40 patients in each group. The mean age of patients in group I (TURP) and group II (TUIP) was 63.6 and 66.2 years, respectively. Preoperative parameters in both groups showed no statistically significant differences with regard to uroflow parameters and prostate weight. At 48 months follow-up the mean voided volume increased from 161 ml to 356 ml in group I and from 161 ml to 341 ml in group II, Q-max increased from 8.4 to 18.4 in group I and 8.4 to 16.6 in group II, the IPSS decreased from 19 to 5.8 in group I and from 19 to 6.3 in group II and PVR decreased from 107 ml to 20 ml in Group I and from 109 ml to 21 ml in Group II (all differences statistically significant). Comparing groups I and II there were statistically significant differences with regard to mean operative time (60.0 versus 20.6 min), duration of catheterization (3.2 versus 2.2 days), hospital stay (3.7 versus 2.6 days), and the incidence of postoperative retrograde ejaculation (52.5% versus 22.5%) and erectile dysfunction (20% versus 7.5%).ConclusionTUIP and TURP for small prostatic adenoma of less than 30 g are equally effective in providing symptomatic improvement. TUIP is more advantageous with to side-effects, operative time, hospital stay and the duration of catheterization.     

小切口联合经尿道前列腺电切术治疗前列腺增生合并膀胱结石

目的探讨前列腺增生症合并膀胱结石患者同期行膀胱取石和前列腺切除的临床效果。方法回顾性分析2000年9月～2004年6月我院32例采用小切口联合经尿道前列腺电切术(transurethralresectionoftheprostate,TURP)治疗前列腺增生合并膀胱结石的临床资料,腹壁小切口取出膀胱结石,利用此切口留置膀胱造瘘,再行TURP。结果32例均一次手术成功,取石率100%。手术时间45～120min,平均60min。术中出血量50～200ml,平均100ml。术后留置膀胱造瘘管2～3d,三腔气囊尿管3～7d。术后住院5～8d,平均6d。32例随访4～16个月,8例尿道狭窄,经尿道扩张后排尿正常,术后最大尿流率>15ml/s。结论对前列腺增生症合并膀胱大结石或多发结石患者,可首选小切口开放取石联合TURP。     

UroLift®

The implantation of a tissue retractor (UroLift®, Neotract, Pleasanton, CA) allows for the first time as a non-ablative operative technique, moderate deobstruction without removal or destruction of prostate tissue. The achievable treatment results are at least comparable to drug therapy with respect to alleviation of suffering and symptoms (primary treatment aim) and superior with respect deobstruction. The advantage of this method compared to all other conservative and operative therapy procedures is preservation of sexual function. An evaluation of this method is currently being carried out and compared to TURP in prospective, randomized studies (BPH6 study) and the results are expected in 2015.     

非那雄胺剂量对减少经尿道前列腺电切术中出血的影响

目的评价术前服用不同剂量的非那雄胺对经尿道前列腺电切除术（TURP）术中出血量的影响及其作用机理。方法90例拟行TURP术的良性前列腺增生患者,随机分为3组：5 mg组（术前2周每天服用非那雄胺5 mg）、10 mg组（术前2周每天服用非那雄胺10 mg）及未服药组,每组30例。记录各组TURP前列腺切除重量、手术时间、计算术中出血量。免疫组织化学SP法检测各组前列腺组织微血管密度（MVD）及血管内皮生长因子（VEGF）蛋白表达,并进行统计学分析。结果5 mg组、10 mg组及未服药组前列腺组织平均手术切除量分别为（22.3±6.2）g、（22.5±6.5）g和（23.2±5.3）g,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。与未服药组比较,服药组的手术时间、术中平均出血量、前列腺组织MVD值、VEGF阳性计数均显著降低,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,但5 mg组与10 mg组差异无显著性意义（P〉0.05）。结论术前2周每天服用非那雄胺5 mg即可有效抑制前列腺组织中VEGF蛋白表达,抑制前列腺组织血管生成,从而缩短TURP手术时间,减少术中失血量。     

Spinal versus epidural anesthesia during transurethral resection of the prostate.

The operative superiority of epidural anesthesia during transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) stimulated this study. Twenty patients scheduled for TURP were randomly allocated to receive either spinal anesthesia (n = 10) with 8 ml bupivacaine 0.5%+ 5ml lignocaine 2%. During and after the operative procedure, PR, BP, ECG, and pulse oximetry were monitored, and blood Hb and Hct, plasma free Hb, and serum sodium and potassium levels were measured. Both techniques resulted in similar PR and BP changes. TURP with spinal anesthesia resulted in more prolonged period of hyponatremia and more increased duration of raised plasma free Hb.     

Two-year results of transurethral resection of the prostate versus four 'less invasive' treatment options

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy or transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) versus four less invasive treatment options during a 2-year follow-up. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 95 elderly men with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were assigned prospectively to the following five treatment arms; transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP; n = 28), transurethral electrovaporization (TUVP; n = 17), visual laser ablation of the prostate (VLAP; n = 17), transrectal high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU; n = 20) and transurethral needle ablation (TUNA); n = 15). Preoperative workup included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), uroflowmetry, post-void residual volume (PVR), prostate volume determined by transrectal ultrasonography and a multichannel pressure flow study. Postoperative follow-up at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months included assessment of IPSS, PVR and uroflowmetry. RESULTS: At study entry, patients assigned to one of the five treatment arms were comparable with respect to age, peak flow rate (Q(max)), IPSS, prostate size and the degree of bladder outflow obstruction. During study, 1 patient in the TURP group (4%) required a secondary TURP, as compared to 23.5% (n = 4) after TUVP, 26.7% (n = 4) after VLAP, 15% (n = 4) after HIFU and 20% (n = 3) following TUNA. In patients not subjected to a secondary procedure, the IPSS decreased a mean 13. 9 after TURP, as compared to 12.7 after TUVP, 12.9 after VLAP, 7.0 after HIFU, and 9.8 after TUNA. Q(max) increased 11.5 ml/s (mean) after TURP, as compared to 11.1 ml/s after TUVP, 5.6 ml/s after VLAP, 2.5 ml/s after HIFU and 2.3 ml/s after TUNA. CONCLUSION: In up to a quarter of the patients, a secondary TURP is performed within the first 2 years after 'less invasive' procedures. These data underline the need for long-term studies to reliably assess the role of less invasive procedures and to indicate that TURP is still competitive.     

经尿道等离子双极电切术与传统电切术治疗重度前列腺增生症的比较

目的比较经尿道等离子双极电切术(PKRP)与传统经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP TUVP)对重度前列腺增生症的治疗效果。方法采用PKRP术与TURP TUVP术治疗重度前列腺增生症各32例进行比较。结果两种方法的手术时间、术后IPSS减分率及尿流率改善差异无显著性(P>0.05);但与TURP TUVP术相比,PKRP术术中出血量更少,术中术后无低钠血症及水中毒发生,被膜损伤少而轻。结论PKRP术具有止血好、安全度大、对机体生理功能影响小、并发症少、易掌握等优点,在治疗重度前列腺增生症时更为突出。