Zhonghua nan ke xue = National journal of andrology · 2011
[Transurethral resection of the prostate for advanced hormone-refractory prostate cancer: a feasibility study].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание 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.
Yang Jian-xun, Fu Qi-zhong, Lü Guang-yao, Dong Sheng-fang, Liu Ying
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO).
METHODS: We included in this study 43 cases of advanced prostate cancer with BOO treated by TURP, and analyzed their IPSS, maximum urinary flow rate and relevant risk factors pre-operatively and at 3 and 12 months after TURP.
RESULTS: Compared with the baseline, IPSS and the maximum urinary flow rate of the patients showed significant differences 3 months after surgery ([19.60 +/- 0.41] score vs. [9.58 +/- 0.33] score, [4.93 +/- 0.68] ml/s vs. [8.96 +/- 0.47] ml/s, P < 0.05), but not at 12 months ([15.73 +/- 0.66] score, [5.67 +/- 0.44] ml/s). In multiple regression analysis, a good outcome was associated with pre-operative acute urinary retention, while poor prognosis with hormone-refractory prostate cancer.
CONCLUSION: In the treatment of advanced hormone-refractory prostate cancer with BOO, TURP can reduce IPSS and increase the maximum urinary flow rate in the early period after surgery, but its long-term effect is not so desirable. Meanwhile the operation itself may bring about relevant complications and reduce the patient's quality of life.
METHODS: We included in this study 43 cases of advanced prostate cancer with BOO treated by TURP, and analyzed their IPSS, maximum urinary flow rate and relevant risk factors pre-operatively and at 3 and 12 months after TURP.
RESULTS: Compared with the baseline, IPSS and the maximum urinary flow rate of the patients showed significant differences 3 months after surgery ([19.60 +/- 0.41] score vs. [9.58 +/- 0.33] score, [4.93 +/- 0.68] ml/s vs. [8.96 +/- 0.47] ml/s, P < 0.05), but not at 12 months ([15.73 +/- 0.66] score, [5.67 +/- 0.44] ml/s). In multiple regression analysis, a good outcome was associated with pre-operative acute urinary retention, while poor prognosis with hormone-refractory prostate cancer.
CONCLUSION: In the treatment of advanced hormone-refractory prostate cancer with BOO, TURP can reduce IPSS and increase the maximum urinary flow rate in the early period after surgery, but its long-term effect is not so desirable. Meanwhile the operation itself may bring about relevant complications and reduce the patient's quality of life.