World journal of urology · 2018
Combined prostatic urethral lift and remodeling of the prostate and bladder neck: a modified transurethral approach in the treatment of symptomatic lower urinary tract obstruction.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание 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.
Schoenthaler Martin, Sievert Karl-Dietrich, Schoeb Dominik Stefan, Miernik Arkadiusz, Kunit Thomas, Hein Simon, Herrmann Thomas R W, Wilhelm Konrad
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of combining prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and a limited resection of the prostatic middle lobe or bladder neck incision in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
METHODS: Twenty-eight patients were treated at two tertiary centers and followed prospectively. Patient evaluations included patient characteristics, relief of LUTS symptoms, erectile and ejaculatory function, continence, operative time and adverse events. Patients were followed for a mean of 10.9 months.
RESULTS: Patient characteristics were as follows: age 66 years (46-85), prostate volume 39.6 cc (22-66), preoperative IPSS/AUASI 20 (6-35)/QoL 3.9 (1-6)/peak flow 10.5 mL/s (4.0-19)/post-void residual volume (PVR) 123 mL (0-500). Mean operating time was 31 min (9-55). Postoperative complications were minor except for the surgical retreatment of one patient for blood clot retention (Clavien 3b). One patient required catheterization due to urinary retention. Reduction of symptoms (IPSS - 59.6%), increase in QoL (+ 49.0%), increase in flow (+ 111.5%), and reduction of PVR (- 66.8%) were significant. Antegrade ejaculation was always maintained.
CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a combination of PUL and transurethral surgical techniques is feasible, safe, and effective. This approach may be offered to patients with moderate size prostates including those with unfavorable anatomic conditions for PUL. This procedure is still 'minimally invasive' and preserves sexual function. In addition, it may add to a higher functional efficacy compared to PUL alone.
STUDY REGISTER NUMBER: DRKS00008970.
METHODS: Twenty-eight patients were treated at two tertiary centers and followed prospectively. Patient evaluations included patient characteristics, relief of LUTS symptoms, erectile and ejaculatory function, continence, operative time and adverse events. Patients were followed for a mean of 10.9 months.
RESULTS: Patient characteristics were as follows: age 66 years (46-85), prostate volume 39.6 cc (22-66), preoperative IPSS/AUASI 20 (6-35)/QoL 3.9 (1-6)/peak flow 10.5 mL/s (4.0-19)/post-void residual volume (PVR) 123 mL (0-500). Mean operating time was 31 min (9-55). Postoperative complications were minor except for the surgical retreatment of one patient for blood clot retention (Clavien 3b). One patient required catheterization due to urinary retention. Reduction of symptoms (IPSS - 59.6%), increase in QoL (+ 49.0%), increase in flow (+ 111.5%), and reduction of PVR (- 66.8%) were significant. Antegrade ejaculation was always maintained.
CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a combination of PUL and transurethral surgical techniques is feasible, safe, and effective. This approach may be offered to patients with moderate size prostates including those with unfavorable anatomic conditions for PUL. This procedure is still 'minimally invasive' and preserves sexual function. In addition, it may add to a higher functional efficacy compared to PUL alone.
STUDY REGISTER NUMBER: DRKS00008970.