Journal of endourology · 2013
A randomized trial comparing diode laser enucleation of the prostate with plasmakinetic enucleation and resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Xu Abai, Zou Yong, Li Bingkun, Liu Chunxiao, Zheng Shaobo, Li Hulin, Xu Yawen, Chen Binshen, Xu Kai, Shen Haiyan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We compared the safety and efficacy of diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) with plasmakinetic enucleation and resection of the prostate (PKERP).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 80 patients with bladder outflow obstruction from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were randomly assigned to either DiLEP or PKERP prospectively. All patients were assessed preoperatively and followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Baseline characteristics of the patients, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were compared. The operative data and perioperative and postoperative complications were also recorded.
RESULTS: The preoperative data were comparable between the two groups. The DiLEP group had significantly shorter operative time, postoperative irrigation, time and catheterization time than the PKERP group (P=0.000, P=0.000 and P=0.000). The drop in hemoglobin level was statistically significantly less in the DiLEP group (P=0.002). There were no statistical differences in complications between the two groups except irritative symptoms (P=0.018). At the 3, 6, and 12-month follow-up, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum flow rate, quality of life, postvoid residual, prostate volume, and prostate-specific antigen level (P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of DiLEP and PKERP were similar for relieving obstruction and low urinary tract symptoms. DiLEP provides less risk of hemorrhage, reduced bladder irrigation, and catheter times. The downward morcellation technique is more efficient than the resection technique. Future well designed randomized trials with extended follow-up and larger sample sizes may be needed to better verify the advantage of DiLEP in treating patients with symptomatic BPH.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 80 patients with bladder outflow obstruction from benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were randomly assigned to either DiLEP or PKERP prospectively. All patients were assessed preoperatively and followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Baseline characteristics of the patients, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were compared. The operative data and perioperative and postoperative complications were also recorded.
RESULTS: The preoperative data were comparable between the two groups. The DiLEP group had significantly shorter operative time, postoperative irrigation, time and catheterization time than the PKERP group (P=0.000, P=0.000 and P=0.000). The drop in hemoglobin level was statistically significantly less in the DiLEP group (P=0.002). There were no statistical differences in complications between the two groups except irritative symptoms (P=0.018). At the 3, 6, and 12-month follow-up, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum flow rate, quality of life, postvoid residual, prostate volume, and prostate-specific antigen level (P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of DiLEP and PKERP were similar for relieving obstruction and low urinary tract symptoms. DiLEP provides less risk of hemorrhage, reduced bladder irrigation, and catheter times. The downward morcellation technique is more efficient than the resection technique. Future well designed randomized trials with extended follow-up and larger sample sizes may be needed to better verify the advantage of DiLEP in treating patients with symptomatic BPH.