Photoselective laser vaporization prostatectomy for acute urinary retention in China

PURPOSE: To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of photoselective laser vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in the treatment of patients with acute urinary retention (AUR) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients (mean age 72 +/- 5 years, range 65-89) with AUR because of BPH were treated with a prospective trial of PVP with the potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) laser. The treatment outcome was evaluated with subjective and objective tests at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after PVP using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), disease-specific quality of life (QoL) score, postvoid residual (PVR) urine volume, and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax). The International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire and a self-designed ejaculatory questionnaire were completed at different follow-up times to determine patient satisfaction and changes in sexual function. RESULTS: After preliminary urine drainage and adequate preoperative preparation, PVP was performed and bladder outlet obstruction was effectively relieved. The mean prostate volume was 62.5 +/- 11.7 cc, and the mean residual volume with retention was 650 mL (range 240-1200 mL). Mean operative time was 28.6 +/- 5.7 minutes. Mean catheterization duration was 5.6 days (range 3-14 d). There was significant subjective improvement of symptoms and objective improvement in urinary flow rates at 12 months. The mean IPSS and QoL score decreased significantly (P < 0.05). Mean PVR volume also decreased. The mean Qmax was 16.2 +/- 4.6 mL/sec after treatment. Only two patients had recurrent urinary retention during follow-up. There were no intraoperative or postoperative adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The early clinical results suggest that the PVP is a promising safe, effective, and less-invasive treatment with minimal morbidity for patients with urine retention secondary to BPH.     

GreenLight HPS 120-W laser photoselective vaporization of the prostate as early therapy for acute urinary retention in advanced prostate cancer patients

We evaluate the safety, efficacy, and oncological outcomes of early palliative photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) by GreenLight high-performance system (HPS) 120-W laser in patients with acute urinary retention (AUR) induced by advanced prostate cancer (PCa). A total of 39 advanced PCa patients with AUR who underwent PVP were enrolled in this retrospective study. Baseline parameters, perioperative, and postoperative complications were reviewed. The functional outcomes were evaluated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) score, peak urinary flow rate (Q _max), and postvoid residual urine volume (PVR). At baseline, mean age was 72.8?±?6.8 years and mean prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 45.2?±?26.9 ng/mL. The average energy consumed was 171.2?±?72.3 kJ during a mean operative time of 46.3?±?13.7 min. Mean catheterization duration was 3.3?±?0.8 days. Mean hospitalization time was 5.2?±?0.5 days. Compared with the preoperative values, there were significant continuous improvement in IPSS, QoL score, Q _max, and PVR at all time points of follow-up. The mean PSA nadir was 0.33?±?0.15 ng/mL and the mean time to PSA nadir was 10.3?±?2.5 months. Nine patients (23 %) eventually developed hormone refractory prostate cancer. No patient experienced severe intraoperative and postoperative complications. Our preliminary investigation shows that GreenLight HPS 120-W laser PVP is a safe and effective treatment for advanced PCa patients with AUR. Patients may obtain some oncological benefits from tumor cytoreduction by early palliative PVP.     

Photoselective vaporization of the prostate with GreenLight 120-W laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The aim of this study is to assess the overall efficacy and safety of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) with GreenLight 120-W laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for treating patients of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). We performed a literature search of The Cochrane Library and the electronic databases, including Embase, Medline, and Web of Science. Manual searches were conducted of the conference proceedings, including European Association of Urology and American Urological Association (2007 to 2012). Outcomes reviewed included clinical baseline characteristics, perioperative data, complications, and postoperative functional results, such as postvoid residual (PVR), international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), and maximum flow rate (Q_max). Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were enrolled. Three hundred and forty-seven patients undergone 120-W PVP, and 350 patients were treated with TURP in the RCTs. There were no significant differences for clinical characteristics in these trials. In perioperative data, catheterization time and length of hospital stay were shorter in the PVP group. However, the operation time was shorter in the TURP group. Capsular perforation, blood transfusion, clot retention, and macroscopic hematuria were markedly less likely in PVP-treated subjects. The other complications between PVP and TURP did not demonstrate a statistic difference. There were no significant differences in QoL, PVR, IPSS, and Q_max in the 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months of postoperative follow-up. There was no significant difference at postoperation follow-up of functional outcomes including IPSS, PVR, Q_max, and QoL between the TURP-treated subjects and PVP-treated subjects. Owing to a shorter catheterization time, reduced hospital duration and less complication, PVP could be used as an alternative and a promising minimal invasive surgical procedure for the treatment of BPH.     

选择性绿激光汽化术治疗重度前列腺增生患者的临床分析

目的探讨应用选择性绿激光汽化术（PVP）治疗重度前列腺增生症患者的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析自2004年7月至2008年7月应用PVP治疗78例前列腺体积大于80ml的良性前列腺增生症患者的临床资料。观察患者手术时间、住院时间、保留导尿管时间、输血率、术前后国际前列腺症状评分（IPS8）、最大尿流率、前列腺体积的变化及并发症。结果所有手术均成功,无输血,未出现电切综合征。平均手术时间（81．4±7．6）min,平均留置尿管时间（3．5±1．3）d,术后早期急性尿潴留9例（11．5％）,轻度尿路刺激症状21例（26．9％）,尿路感染10例（12．8％）。术后1个月IPSS评分、最大尿流率（Qmax）及前列腺体积改变均有统计学意义（P〈0．01）,39例随访时间10-48个月,永久性尿失禁1例,6例需再次手术治疗,无尿道狭窄并发症发生。结论PVP治疗重度良性前列腺增生方法安全可行,但术后早期并发症发生率较高,可作为经尿道前列腺电切术（TURP）的一种补充手术方法应用于高危患者。     

高功率绿激光治疗高龄高危前列腺疾病的疗效评价

目的探讨120W高功率绿激光选择性前列腺汽化术（HPS PVP）治疗高危前列腺疾病的疗效及安全性。方法对31例高危前列腺疾病患者进行HPS PVP。其中前列腺增生24例,前列腺癌7例。对手术时间、出血量、光纤能量消耗、术后留置导尿时间、并发症、最大尿流率、IPSS、QOL、残余尿等指标进行评价。结果 29例顺利完成手术。手术时间30～85min,平均（43±18.4）min。术中出血20～50mL,平均（26±10.7）mL。无输血病例。术中光纤能量平均消耗（247±38.1）kJ。术后留置导尿管时间24～96h,平均（38.8±15.1）h。无尿失禁、继发性出血、急性尿潴留再次手术病例。术后1月最大尿流率由术前平均（5.2±2.7）mL/s提高到（15.3±4.8）mL/s。IPSS评分由术前平均（24.4±3.2）减少到（7.8±2.5）。QOL由术前平均（5.1±0.3）减少到（2.5±0.2）。残余尿量由术前平均（251.3±38.8）mL减少到术后（32.5±9.2）mL。手术前后差异均有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论 120W高功率PVP治疗高龄高危前列腺疾病患者,具有手术时间短,出血少,安全性高,术后并发症少,留置导尿管时间短等优点。不仅可作为高龄高危良性前列腺增生患者,也可作为前列腺癌患者首选的手术方式。     

KTP激光汽化治疗伴下尿路梗阻的晚期前列腺癌

目的 总结经尿道KTP激光前列腺汽化术(PVP)治疗伴有下尿路梗阻晚期前列腺癌的临床疗效.方法 伴有下尿路梗阻的晚期前列腺癌患者33例.年龄(76±6)岁.其中T3 18例,T4 15例.前列腺体积36～140 ml.患者术前IPSS为28.2±3.6,QOL为5.0±0.7,Q_(max) 4.7～10.1 ml/s,残余尿量(RU)为(126.0±25.2)ml.33例均行KTP激光经尿道汽化前列腺治疗.19例初发前列腺癌患者同时行PVP和睾丸切除,14例为睾丸切除和抗雄激素等治疗后仍有明显的排尿梗阻症状,有尿潴留史15例.分别对术前及PVP术后1、6个月患者IPSS、QOL Qmax、血PSA、RU等指标进行统计分析.采用SPSS 13.0软件处理数据,均数间比较采用配对t检验.结果 33例手术经过顺利.28例术后3～4 d拔除导尿管,排尿情况改善明显;5例初次拔管后仍有排尿困难而再次留置导尿,延时拔管后均能自行排尿.术后并发症包括血尿14例、短暂尿失禁3例.术后1个月时IPSS、QOL、Q_(max)、血PSA、RU分别为14.6±2.8、3.1±0.4、(13.2±5.6)ml/s、(16.3±13.4)ng/ml、(24.6±5.9)ml;术后6个月时分别为14.2±3.3、3.4±0.5、(12.2±3.4)ml/s、(8.0±6.5)ng/ml、(31.1±8.7)ml.术后1、6个月的IPSS评分、QOL、Qmax、血PSA与术前比较差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.01),术后1、6个月间IPSS评分、QOL、Q_(max)比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 PVP可以有效解除前列腺癌患者的下尿路梗阻症状,明显改善患者生活质量.安全、有效.     

Photoselective vaporization of the prostate with the potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser in men with prostates of >100 mL

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in men with prostates of >100 mL and causing bladder outlet obstruction (BOO), using the high-power 80 W potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser (GreenLight PV, Laserscope, San Jose, CA, USA), which offers rapid tissue ablation with minimal bleeding. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We assessed 54 consecutive patients with prostates of >100 mL (mean 135, SD 42, range 100-300) who had PVP between May 2003 and August 2005. Evaluations before PVP included urine flowmetry, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), a quality-of life (QoL) score, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and prostate volume measured by transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). RESULTS: The mean (SD, range) duration of PVP was 81.6 (22.9, 39-150) min, the mean energy used for PVP was 278 (60, 176-443) kJ and the mean duration of catheterization after PVP was 23.0 (17.1, 0-72) h. The mean (sd) maximum urinary flow rate improved from 8.0 (3.1) to 18.2 (8.1), 18.5 (9.2), 17.9 (7.8) and 19.3 (9.8) mL/s at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, respectively. The IPSS and QoL scores showed similar improvements, and there was a statistically significant reduction in PSA level and prostate volume after PVP. There was no major complication and no patient had transurethral resection syndrome or a blood transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: The 80 W KTP laser PVP offers rapid tissue ablation in patients with BOO caused by a large prostate. The short- and medium-term outcomes show that this technique can be a viable alternative to open prostatectomy.     

经尿道等离子体双极前列腺电切术与经尿道前列腺电切术的疗效比较研究

目的:对比研究经尿道等离子体双极电切术(transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate,PKRP)及经尿道前列腺电切术(transurethral resection of prostate,TURP)的安全性与临床疗效。方法:纳入2010年3月至2012年9月78例有下尿路症状(lower urinary tract symptoms,LUTS)的良性前列腺增生(benign prostatic hyperplasia,BPH)患者,按1:1的比例随机分为两组,一组行PKRP(PKRP组),另一组行TURP(TURP组)。对比两组患者术前、术后(1个月、12个月)国际前列腺症状评分(international prostate symptom scores,IPSS)、最大尿流率(maximum flow-rate,Qmax)、生活质量(quality of life,QOL)、残余尿量(postvoid residual volume,PVR),围手术期基本情况,如手术时间、留置导尿管时间、膀胱冲洗量、住院时间;并发症发生率,如经尿道电切综合征(transurethral resection syndrome,TURS)、输血、尿潴留、尿道狭窄等。结果:两组患者手术时间、术中与术后冲洗液量、术后膀胱冲洗时间、包膜穿孔、尿道损伤、输血、尿潴留、二次手术、尿道狭窄发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),PKRP组留置导尿管时间、住院时间明显少于TURP组。PKRP组无一例发生TURS,TURP组中6例患者发生TURS(P<0.05)。术后1个月、12个月两组患者IPSS、Qmax、QOL、PVR差异均无统计学意义,但两组患者IPSS评分均较术前显著下降,Qmax显著增高,PVR显著减少(P<0.05)。结论:PKRP与TURP具有相同的治疗效果,相较TURP,PKRP具有更短的留置导尿管时间、住院时间,发生TURS的风险更低;因此,PKRP是可供选择的前景良好的治疗BPH的微创术式。     

经尿道选择性绿激光汽化术与前列腺汽化电切除术治疗良性前列腺增生的疗效比较

目的 比较经尿道选择性绿激光前列腺汽化术（PVP）与前列腺汽化电切除术（TUVP）治疗良性前列腺增生（BPH）的安全性及疗效。方法 随机采用PVP与TUVP两种手术方式治疗BPH患者163例,其中PVP组105例,TUVP组58例。对两组患者的国际前列腺症状评分（IPSS）、生活质量评分（QOL）、术中出血量、手术时间、冲洗液清亮时间、留置尿管时间、最大尿流率、术后并发症等进行比较。结果 两组手术前后IPSS、QOL、Qmax、剩余尿量（RUV）比较均显著改善（P〈0．05）,但两组之间症状改善差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。TUVP组手术时间平均（37±15）min,PVP组则为平均（45±28）min,TUVP手术操作时间少于PVP,但差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。PVP组术中出血量少、拔除尿管早,优于TUVP组（P〈0,05）。术后随访6个月两组前列腺症状评分及最大尿流率疗效相同。TUVP组术后血尿明显（41．4％）,需膀胱冲洗,而PVP术后尿路刺激症状明显（55．2％,P〈0．05）。结论 PVP手术是一种手术过程非常安全、并发症少,能达到与TUVP完全相同治疗效果的手术方式。     

2μm激光治疗小体积前列腺增生疗效观察

目的 探讨2 μm激光汽化切除技术联合2 μm激光膀胱颈内切开治疗小体积良性前列腺增生（BPH）患者的疗效和安全性.方法 45例体积≤40 mLBPH患者,采用经尿道2 μm激光汽化切除增生前列腺联合2μm激光膀胱颈切开.观察术中出血情况、手术时间、术后尿管留置时间、手术并发症,比较手术前后患者国际前列腺症状评分（IPSS）、生活质量评分（QOL）、最大尿流率（Qmax）及残余尿量（PVR）等指标差异.结果 45例患者均顺利完成手术.输血2例;手术前后血电解质及血红蛋白浓度差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;平均手术时间（80±15）min;术后留置尿管4~6d.术后随访2~12个月,所有患者均未发生尿道狭窄,1例术后排尿困难改善不明显者给予留置导尿管1月后成功拔除尿管.IPSS评分及QOL评分分别从（24.2±5.4）分和（4.9±0.2）分降至（7.5±1.6）分和（2.3±0.3）分;Qmax由术前（7.1±0.5）mL/s升至（18.2±1.6）mL/s;PVR由术前（82 ± 1.2）mL下降至术后（15.3±3.4）mL,手术前后比较差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.结论 2 μm激光汽化切除技术联合2 μm激光膀胱颈内切开治疗小体积BPH安全有效.     

Is there a correlation between the outcome of transurethral resection of prostate and preoperative degree of bladder outlet obstruction?

To compare the impact of transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) on symptom scores and maximal flow rates (Qmax) in patients with equivocal bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) and definite BOO and to assess the relationship between the surgical outcomes and degree of preoperative BOO, we prospectively evaluated men with lower urinary tract symptoms and bladder outlet obstruction index (BOOI) greater than 20, who were refractory to conventional medical treatment and underwent TURP. Urodynamic evaluation, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), uroflowmetry, post-void residual volume (PVR) check and transrectal ultrasound were performed. 20相似文献   

Evaluation of greenlight photoselective vaporization of the prostate for the treatment of high-risk patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia

目的:评估选择性绿激光前列腺汽化术(PVP)治疗具有严重下尿路症状的前列腺增生(BPH)高危患者的可行性和安全性,探讨其临床和排尿效果。方法:采用 PVP 治疗85名前列腺增生(BPH)高危患者,激光功率80W,激光是通过汽化双鞘镜(23F)侧孔光纤传输。分别评估手术时间、术中出血量、术后留置尿管时间、国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量评分(QoL)、尿流率、残余尿量及近期并发症等指标。结果:所有患者手术顺利,PVP 的主要优点是手术时间短,平均手术时间为25.6±7.6分钟,出血少56.8±147.3 mL,留置尿管时间短1.6±0.8 d。IPSS 及 QoL 分别从29.6±5.4和5.4±0.6降低到9.5±2.6和1.3±0.6。患者对术后效果满意。患者的平均最大尿流率增加到17.8mL/s,残留尿量降到55.6 mL。上述结果与术前各项指标比皆有显著差异(P<0.05)。无患者要求输血及液体吸收,并发症少,且满意率高。结论:PVP 手术时间短,患者耐受性好,对于 BPH 高危患者来说是一种安全有效的微创式手术法,所以它可能是有梗阻性尿道症 BPH 高危患者的一种良好治疗选择。     

TUVRP联合保留附睾去势术治疗膀胱出口梗阻的晚期前列腺癌

目的探讨经尿道前列腺汽化电切（TUVRP）术联合保留附睾去势术治疗膀胱出口梗阻（BOO）的晚期前列腺癌（PCa）之疗效。方法对62例晚期PCa伴BOO患者应用保留附睾去势术联合TUVRP等综合治疗。比较分析术前及术后3个月的前列腺症状评分（IPSS）、最大尿流率（MFR）、残余尿以及血清总PSA值情况。采用问卷调查保留附睾去势患者的满意度。结果62例手术均一次成功,未发生大出血和电切综合征（TURS）,无术后阴囊血肿等并发症。TUVRP平均时间（65&#177;12）min,保留附睾、附睾成形及睾丸切除平均时间（28&#177;9）min。患者对去势术的满意度达到（59/62）95.2%。术后随访10～38个月,平均26个月。55例获随访。癌性死亡12例,非癌性死亡8例。术后患者排尿梗阻症状明显改善,术前IPSS（25.9&#177;1.8）分,术后3个月的IPSS（9.1&#177;0.5）分（P〈0.05）;MFR术前平均（6.5&#177;2.9）ml/s,术后3个月（13.2&#177;4.1）ml/s（P〈0.05）;术前残余尿（167&#177;41）ml,术后3个月残余尿（30&#177;13）ml（P〈0.05）;术前血清总PSA值（70.3&#177;8.5）ng/ml,术后3个月总PSA值（15.2&#177;1.7）ng/ml（P〈0.05）。术后有少数患者出现尿频和急迫性尿失禁,有2例患者随访时出现排尿梗阻症状而再次行TUVRP术。结论对晚期PCa病人伴BOO行TUVRP是安全有效的治疗手段,能迅速解除BOO症状;保留附睾去势术安全、经济且满足患者对外观形态和心理需要。     

GreenLight laser photoselective vaporization of the prostate for treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia/lower urinary tract symptoms in patients with different post-void residual urine

The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of GreenLight laser photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) for the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia/lower urinary tract symptoms (BPH/LUTS) in patients with different post-void residual urine (PVR). BPH/LUTS patients treated with PVP from January 2014 to January 2016 were enrolled in the present study. All patients were divided into PVR?>?50, 50?≤?PVR?<?400, and PVR?≥?400 ml groups, and standard general and urological methods for BPH/LUTS were carried out. PVP surgery was performed, and the follow-up outcome was investigated 6 months after surgery. A total of 429 patients were included, and there were no significant differences in comorbid diseases or habits among the three groups. The maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) differed significantly among the groups (P?<?0.001), while patients in the PVR?<?50 ml group had higher maximum detrusor pressure (Pdet.max) level than the other two groups (P?<?0.001). Patients in 50?≤?PVR?<?400 (P?<?0.001) and PVR?≥?400 (P?<?0.001) ml groups were more likely to develop detrusor underactivity than those in the PVR?<?50 ml group. All patients were treated with PVP, and there were no severe complications requiring rehospitalization or reoperation except nine designed re-treatments. Follow-up data of 387 patients were available. Significant improvement in outcome parameters (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS], Qmax, and PVR) was observed in comparison with baseline measurements for the three groups. PVP significantly improved the IPSS, Qmax, and PVR in patients with different PVR; PVP is a safe and effective procedure for BPH/LUTS patients.     

Photoselective vaporization of the prostate using the 180W lithium triborate laser

Introduction: Photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) is widely used to treat benign prostatic obstruction (BPO), but there is little experience reported on the new more powerful 180W lithium triborate (LBO) laser. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of using the 180W LBO laser to treat BPO by examining a multicentre Australian experience. Methods: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data on all men treated by 180W LBO laser PVP by eight urologists across six Australian hospitals, from July 2011 to August 2011, was performed. Perioperative and functional outcomes were examined at baseline and 3 months. Results: Of the 85 men (median age 70 years, prostate volume 51 cm³) identified, 27% (23/85) were in urinary retention and 44% (37/85) were taking antiplatelet/anticoagulant medication. Median operating time was 46 min, laser time 27 min, energy use 211 kJ, post‐operative duration of catheterization 15 h and hospitalization 22 h. Functional outcomes from baseline to 3 months, respectively, were for IPSS 25–7; QoL 5–2; Qmax 7.7–18.4; and PVR 147–38. All improvements were statistically significant (P < 0.01). Thirty‐eight per cent (32/85) of patients experienced at least one adverse event. Most adverse events were low Clavien–Dindo grade I–II. There were five grade III, two grade IV and no grade V adverse events. Sixty per cent (51/85) of men were able to be discharged home voiding successfully without a catheter within 24‐h post‐PVP. Conclusions: Our early multicentre Australian experience indicates the 180W LBO laser PVP is an efficacious and safe treatment for BPO.     

2μm激光汽化切除术治疗高龄高危良性前列腺增生

目的探讨2μm激光汽化切除术治疗高龄高危良性前列腺增生（BPH）的安全性和有效性。方法应用70W 2μm连续波医用激光对65例高龄高危BPH患者行2μm激光前列腺汽化切除术。患者年龄80~92岁,平均（84.6±2.7）岁。观察平均手术时间、术中出血量、术后留置尿管时间、手术并发症,记录并计算手术前后国际前列腺症状评分（IPSS）、生活质量评分（QOL）、最大尿流率（Qmax）及残余尿量（PVR）等指标的差异。结果全部手术均成功,平均手术时间（40.8±7.5）min,术中出血量（60.0±12.0）mL,无输血病例。术后平均留置尿管时间（3.0±1.0）d。术后随访3月,IPSS及QOL评分由术前平均24.6±4.5及5.2±0.2分别下降至6.8±1.2及1.4±0.3,Qmax由术前（4.3±0.5）mL/s增加至术后（18.6±1.5）mL/s,PVR由术前（60±0.5）mL下降至术后（15.6±4.6）mL,手术前后比较均有显著性差异（P〈0.01）。术后无尿失禁及继发性出血。结论 2μm激光前列腺汽化切除术治疗高龄高危BPH安全有效。     

新型超脉冲钕-钇铝石榴石激光前列腺剜除术与等离子双极前列腺剜除术治疗前列腺增生疗效比较

目的比较经尿道新型钕-钇铝石榴石(Nd:YAG)激光前列腺剜除术(SPLEP)与等离子双极前列腺剜除术(PKEP)治疗前列腺增生(BPH)的疗效及安全性。方法简单随机将2019年6月到2020年6月在武汉大学人民医院泌尿外科住院治疗的82例BPH患者分为两组,分别行SPLEP(41例)和PKEP(41例),术后随访3个月,并记录围手术期手术时间、血红蛋白(Hb)下降、膀胱冲洗时间、留置导尿管时间、术后住院时间和术后1、3个月国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量评分(QOL)、最大尿流率(Qmax)、残余尿量(PVR)以及并发症情况。组间计量资料比较采用独立样本t检验,计数资料用χ²检验。结果SPLEP和PKEP两组手术时间分别为(70.90±25.81)min和(60.41±20.44)min,Hb下降分别为(14.61±6.47)g/L和(19.10±6.18)g/L,膀胱冲洗时间分别为(1.88±0.68)d和(2.27±0.67)d,留置导尿管时间分别为(5.93±1.03)d和(6.44±1.00)d,术后住院时间分别为(6.93±1.03)d和(7.66±1.18)d,差异均有统计学意义(t=-2.039、3.212、2.618、2.278、2.993,P<0.05)。两组术后IPSS、QOL、Qmax、PVR较术前均有显著改善(t=-24.783、-33.261、32.451、-16.036,P<0.05),差异有统计学意义,两组IPSS、QOL、Qmax、PVR差异均无统计学意义(t=-1.280、0.790、-1.731、0.175,P>0.05)。SPLEP组和PKEP组分别出现3、6例短暂性尿失禁(χ²=1.123,P>0.05),差异无统计学意义。SPLEP组总并发症5例低于PKEP组的7例,但差异无统计学意义(χ²=0.390,P>0.05)。结论SPLEP与PKEP均是治疗BPH的安全、有效的手术方式,与PKEP组比较,SPLEP组虽然手术时间稍长,但止血效果更好,膀胱冲洗时间、留置尿管时间、术后住院时间更短。     

单极电切镜经尿道前列腺剜除术与经尿道前列腺切除术治疗前列腺增生症的临床对比研究

目的 临床比较单极电切镜经尿道前列腺剜除术(M-TUEP)与经尿道前列腺切除术(M-TURP)的近期疗效。方法 将具有手术指征的前列腺体积50ml～75ml的60例前列腺增生症(BPH)患者随机分为两组,分别行M-TUEP和M-TURP。监测、记录患者围手术期和术后3个月时的有关指标,对所测指标进行统计学分析。结果 术前两组一般情况比较,差别无显著性(P>0.05)。M-TUEP组术中出血量、手术时间、术后平均膀胱冲洗时间、留置尿管时间和住院时间、围手术期相关并发症均明显少于M-TURP组(P<0.05)。M-TUEP组切除腺体重量[(40.5±13.3)g]明显多于M-TURP组[(28.7±14.2)g](P<0.05);术后3个月两组患者残余尿量、最大尿流率和IPSS评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),而且均比术前明显改善(P<0.05)。结论 M-TUEP与M-TURP治疗BPH的近期疗效相似;但是M-TUEP的安全性好,切除效率高,并发症少;而且M-TUEP技术易于掌握,也符合卫生经济学原则,更适合在中国推广。     

经尿道前列腺电切术治疗高龄高危前列腺增生症(附216例)

目的探讨经尿道前列腺电切术（TURP）治疗高龄高危前列腺增生症（BPH）的安全性和有效性。方法在积极进行个体化围手术期处理的基础上对216例高龄高危BPH患者行TURP术。结果本组216例安全实施TURP,手术平均时间46min,电切前列腺组织平均41g。随访6～12个月,所有患者排尿通畅,无一例水中毒、永久性尿失禁及继发性出血。国际前列腺症状评分（IPSS）由30.5分降到7.8分,剩余尿（PVR）由156ml降至20ml,最大尿流率（Qmax）由8ml/s增至20ml/s,生活质量评分（QOL）由4.9分降到1.5分,治疗前后IPSS、PVR、Qmax、QOL改变有统计学意义。结论只要加强个体化围手术期的处理,TURP仍是治疗高龄高危BPH安全有效的方法。     

BPH患者组织学前列腺炎与PSA、前列腺体积、PSAD、IPSS、Qmax及PVR的相关性研究

目的:探讨BPH患者组织学前列腺炎与PSA、前列腺体积、PSA密度(PSAD)、IPSS、最大尿流率(Qmax)及残余尿量(PVR)的相关性。方法:手术切除或经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)治疗的BPH患者673例。按照是否伴有组织学前列腺炎将患者分为两组:A组:BPH伴组织学前列腺炎;B组:BPH不伴有组织学前列腺炎。比较两组患者PSA、前列腺体积、PSAD、IPSS、Qmax及PVR。结果:A组PSA水平为(5.64±2.48)μg/L,前列腺体积(43.66±13.11)ml,PSAD 0.129±0.048,IPSS(24.72±5.39)分,Qmax(6.94±3.23)ml/s,PVR(124.90±49.80)ml;B组PSA水平为(4.97±1.99)μg/L,前列腺体积(40.41±11.44)ml,PSAD 0.123±0.034,IPSS(23.40±6.21)分,Qmax(7.75±3.52)ml/s,PVR(112.73±50.03)ml。A组PSA水平、前列腺体积、IPSS和PVR均明显高于B组(P<0.05);A组Qmax明显低于B组(P<0.05);PSAD两组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:组织学前列腺炎能明显增加患者的PSA水平、前列腺体积、IPSS和PVR,降低患者Qmax。但是组织学前列腺炎与PSAD无关;组织学前列腺炎是影响BPH临床进展的重要因素。