Minerva urologica e nefrologica = The Italian journal of urology and nephrology · 2019
Anterograde ejaculation preservation after endoscopic treatments in patients with bladder outlet obstruction: systematic review and pooled-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Cacciamani Giovanni E, Cuhna Frederico, Tafuri Alessandro, Shakir Aliasger, Cocci Andrea, Gill Karanvir, Gómez Rivas Juan, Dourado Aurus, Veneziano Domenico, Okhunov Zhamshid, Capogrosso Paolo, Hueber Pierre A, Alberseen Marteen, Abreu Andre, Migliorini Filippo, Fiori Cristian, Porcaro Antonio B, Porpiglia Francesco, Desai Mihir, Russo Giorgio I, European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists (EAU-YAU) Urotechnology and Men's Health working groups
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Despite the high rate of resolution, ejaculatory dysfunction still is the most common side effect related to surgical treatment of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). The aim of the present systematic review was to compare several technological treatment modalities for the management of lower urinary tract symptoms/BOO in terms of functional and sexual outcomes.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: All English language randomized controlled trials assessing the impact of different endoscopic treatments for BOO were evaluated. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) statement to evaluate PubMed®, Scopus®, and Web of Science™ databases (up to June 2019).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our electronic search identified a total of 2221 papers in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Of these, 142 publications were identified for detailed review, which yielded 21 included in the present systematic review. All groups appeared similar with regards to preoperative IPSS/AUA Score, Qmax, and prostate volume (cc). Patients undergoing endoscopic treatments using ThuLEP, Greenlight or Prostate Artery Embolization techniques had lower-but not statistically significant- relative risk (RR) of retrograde ejaculation compared with conventional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) (RR: 0.90; P=0.35; RR: 0.71; P=0.1; RR0.73; P=0.11). Efficacy of those techniques was equal to TURP.
CONCLUSIONS: Data reporting anterograde ejaculation preservation after endoscopic treatment in patients with benign prostatic enlargement are sparse and heterogeneous. Pooled analyses suggest that new technological alternatives to conventional TURP might improve sexual outcomes, especially for non-ablative treatments.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: All English language randomized controlled trials assessing the impact of different endoscopic treatments for BOO were evaluated. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) statement to evaluate PubMed®, Scopus®, and Web of Science™ databases (up to June 2019).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our electronic search identified a total of 2221 papers in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Of these, 142 publications were identified for detailed review, which yielded 21 included in the present systematic review. All groups appeared similar with regards to preoperative IPSS/AUA Score, Qmax, and prostate volume (cc). Patients undergoing endoscopic treatments using ThuLEP, Greenlight or Prostate Artery Embolization techniques had lower-but not statistically significant- relative risk (RR) of retrograde ejaculation compared with conventional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) (RR: 0.90; P=0.35; RR: 0.71; P=0.1; RR0.73; P=0.11). Efficacy of those techniques was equal to TURP.
CONCLUSIONS: Data reporting anterograde ejaculation preservation after endoscopic treatment in patients with benign prostatic enlargement are sparse and heterogeneous. Pooled analyses suggest that new technological alternatives to conventional TURP might improve sexual outcomes, especially for non-ablative treatments.