World journal of urology · 2012
Urological surgery in patients with hemorrhagic bleeding disorders Hemophilia A, Hemophilia B, von Willebrand disease: a retrospective study with matched pairs analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rogenhofer Sebastian, Hauser Stefan, Breuer Anne, Fechner Guido, Mueller Stefan C, Oldenburg Johannes, Goldmann Georg
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To determine retrospectively the perioperative management and outcome of transurethral prostate/bladder surgery (TURP, TURB) and transrectal prostate biopsy in hemophiliacs.
METHODS: Thirty-seven hemophilic patients underwent TURP (12 patients), TURB (13 patients), or transrectal prostate biopsy (12 patients) with proactive hemostaseological management (i.e., factor supply, close meshed hemostaseological analysis). Thirty-seven non-hemophiliac patients served as matched pairs who matched for age, gender, accompanying diseases, and the type of surgical procedure. The resulting pairs were analyzed for duration of surgery, hospital stay, and complications.
RESULTS: Average TURP length in hemophiliacs was 77.92 min, in the matched pairs group TURP 67.08 min (p = 0.487). Mean TURB length in hemophiliacs was 43.46 min versus 35.38 min in controls (p = 0.678). More important, the length of hospital stay was significant longer in the hemophiliacs undergoing TURP compared to non-hemophiliac control group (12.08 days vs. 5.83 days; p < 0.001). In TURB patients, similar results were found (11.15 days hemophiliacs vs. 6.15 controls; p = 0.018). Regarding complications (bleeding, hemorrhage, readmission), no significant difference between the groups was obtained.
CONCLUSION: Urological interventions in hemophiliac patients with factor supply have the same risk for postoperative complications as in non-hemophiliacs. The only significant difference between hemophiliacs and non-hemophiliacs was the length of hospital stay.
METHODS: Thirty-seven hemophilic patients underwent TURP (12 patients), TURB (13 patients), or transrectal prostate biopsy (12 patients) with proactive hemostaseological management (i.e., factor supply, close meshed hemostaseological analysis). Thirty-seven non-hemophiliac patients served as matched pairs who matched for age, gender, accompanying diseases, and the type of surgical procedure. The resulting pairs were analyzed for duration of surgery, hospital stay, and complications.
RESULTS: Average TURP length in hemophiliacs was 77.92 min, in the matched pairs group TURP 67.08 min (p = 0.487). Mean TURB length in hemophiliacs was 43.46 min versus 35.38 min in controls (p = 0.678). More important, the length of hospital stay was significant longer in the hemophiliacs undergoing TURP compared to non-hemophiliac control group (12.08 days vs. 5.83 days; p < 0.001). In TURB patients, similar results were found (11.15 days hemophiliacs vs. 6.15 controls; p = 0.018). Regarding complications (bleeding, hemorrhage, readmission), no significant difference between the groups was obtained.
CONCLUSION: Urological interventions in hemophiliac patients with factor supply have the same risk for postoperative complications as in non-hemophiliacs. The only significant difference between hemophiliacs and non-hemophiliacs was the length of hospital stay.