A comparative study of thulium laser resection of the prostate and bipolar transurethral plasmakinetic prostatectomy for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia. (29th October 2012)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- A comparative study of thulium laser resection of the prostate and bipolar transurethral plasmakinetic prostatectomy for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia. (29th October 2012)
- Main Title:
- A comparative study of thulium laser resection of the prostate and bipolar transurethral plasmakinetic prostatectomy for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia
- Authors:
- Peng, Bo
Wang, Guang‐chun
Zheng, Jun‐hua
Xia, Sheng‐qiang
Geng, Jiang
Che, Jian‐ping
Yan, Yang
Huang, Jian‐hua
Xu, Yun‐Fei
Yang, Bin - Abstract:
- <abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="bju11610-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?</title> <p> <list id="bju11610-list-5001" list-type="bullet"> <list-item> <p>Thulium laser is a new generation of surgical laser. It is a minimally invasive technology with several advantages, including rapid vaporization and minimal tissue damage and bleeding. However, details regarding the safety and efficacy of thulium laser in treating BPH remains unknown.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>We performed a comparative study in 100 patients with BPH of the safety and efficacy of thulium laser resection of the prostate (TMLRP, <italic>n</italic> = 50) and bipolar transurethral plasmakinetic prostatectomy (TUPKP, <italic>n</italic> = 50). We found that the efficacy and indications were the same in TMLRP and TUPKP. In TUPKP, the morbidity of urethrostenosis was low, and was nearly bloodless in surgery and had higher safety. Nevertheless, TUPKP is more suitable for patients with larger prostate volume.</p> </list-item> </list> </p> </sec> <sec id="bju11610-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Objective</title> <p> <list id="bju11610-list-0001" list-type="bullet"> <list-item> <p>To compare the safety and short‐term efficacy of thulium laser resection of the prostate (TMLRP) and bipolar transurethral plasmakinetic prostatectomy (TUPKP) for the treatment of patients with benign prostatic<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="bju11610-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>What's known on the subject? and What does the study add?</title> <p> <list id="bju11610-list-5001" list-type="bullet"> <list-item> <p>Thulium laser is a new generation of surgical laser. It is a minimally invasive technology with several advantages, including rapid vaporization and minimal tissue damage and bleeding. However, details regarding the safety and efficacy of thulium laser in treating BPH remains unknown.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>We performed a comparative study in 100 patients with BPH of the safety and efficacy of thulium laser resection of the prostate (TMLRP, <italic>n</italic> = 50) and bipolar transurethral plasmakinetic prostatectomy (TUPKP, <italic>n</italic> = 50). We found that the efficacy and indications were the same in TMLRP and TUPKP. In TUPKP, the morbidity of urethrostenosis was low, and was nearly bloodless in surgery and had higher safety. Nevertheless, TUPKP is more suitable for patients with larger prostate volume.</p> </list-item> </list> </p> </sec> <sec id="bju11610-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Objective</title> <p> <list id="bju11610-list-0001" list-type="bullet"> <list-item> <p>To compare the safety and short‐term efficacy of thulium laser resection of the prostate (TMLRP) and bipolar transurethral plasmakinetic prostatectomy (TUPKP) for the treatment of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).</p> </list-item> </list> </p> </sec> <sec id="bju11610-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Methods</title> <p> <list id="bju11610-list-0002" list-type="bullet"> <list-item> <p>A total of l00 patients diagnosed with BPH were randomly divided into two groups, treated with either TMLRP (50, group 1) or TUPKP (50, group 2).</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>There was no significant difference in preoperative variables such as age, prostate volume, prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) level, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate (Q<sub>max</sub>) and postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) between the two groups.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>The perioperative parameters and therapeutic effects were recorded and compared between the two groups.</p> </list-item> </list> </p> </sec> <sec id="bju11610-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p> <list id="bju11610-list-0003" list-type="bullet"> <list-item> <p>There were significant differences in the following parameters between the two groups (TMLRP vs TUPKP [mean ± SD]): operation duration, 61.2 ± 24.2 vs 30.14 ± 15.9 min; catheterization time, 1.8 ± 0.4 vs 3.2 ± 0.6 d; postoperative hospital stay, 3.3 ± 0.8 vs 4.1 ± 1.3 d.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>The volume of blood loss and postoperative bladder irrigation were significantly lower in TMLRP group than in the TUPKP group.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>At 1 month after the operation, there were four cases of urethral stricture in the TUPKP group.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>At 3 months after the operation, IPSS, quality of life (QoL), Q<sub>max</sub> and PVR were significantly improved, with no significant difference between the two groups.</p> </list-item> </list> </p> </sec> <sec id="bju11610-sec-0005" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions</title> <p> <list id="bju11610-list-0004" list-type="bullet"> <list-item> <p>TMLRP is superior to TUPKP in terms of safety, blood loss, recovery time and complication rate, and is as efficacious as TUPKP for treating BPH.</p> </list-item> <list-item> <p>Operation duration was significantly longer in the TMLRP group than in the TUPKP group.</p> </list-item> </list> </p> </sec> </abstract> … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- BJU international. Volume 111:Number 4(2013:Feb.)
- Journal:
- BJU international
- Issue:
- Volume 111:Number 4(2013:Feb.)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 111, Issue 4 (2013)
- Year:
- 2013
- Volume:
- 111
- Issue:
- 4
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2013-0111-0004-0000
- Page Start:
- 633
- Page End:
- 637
- Publication Date:
- 2012-10-29
- Subjects:
- Genitourinary organs -- Diseases -- Periodicals
Genitourinary organs -- Surgery -- Periodicals
Urology -- Periodicals
616.6 - Journal URLs:
- http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1464-410X ↗
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11610.x ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1464-4096
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 2105.758000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 3890.xml