Journal of endourology · 2005
Transurethral microwave thermotherapy: clinical results after 11 years of use.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Vesely Stepan, Knutson Tomas, Dicuio Mauro, Damber Jan-Erik, Dahlstrand Christer
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the durability of the effect of transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) for lower urinary-tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 841 patients with LUTS received TUMT using the Prostatron device at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden. Two treatment programs were used: low-energy Program 2.0 and high-energy Program 3.5. A questionnaire, including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) score, and questions about general health status, was sent to all the patients. The mean followup after TUMT was 8.8 years for Program 2.0 and 2.5 years for Program 3.5.
RESULTS: At the end of follow-up, 67% of the patients treated with Program 2.0 were satisfied with the TUMT. During the follow-up period, 37% of patients experienced worsened symptoms, 18% various complications (e.g., hematuria), and 25% transient urinary-tract infection, and 16% went into retention. Secondary treatment (repeat TUMT, transurethral resection, medical therapy) was needed in 32% of patients. The mean IPSS was 13.5, and QoL score decreased to 2.1. With Program 3.5, 82% of the patients were satisfied, with another 17% having increased symptoms, 17% various complication, 25% urinary tract infection, and 26% retention. Only 7% of patients needed secondary treatment. The IPSS and QoL score went down to 11.4 and 1.6, respectively.
CONCLUSION: These long-term data show that TUMT produces durable improvement and, with its safety and low retreatment rate, presents an attractive alternative for patients with LUTS suggestive of BOO.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 841 patients with LUTS received TUMT using the Prostatron device at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden. Two treatment programs were used: low-energy Program 2.0 and high-energy Program 3.5. A questionnaire, including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) score, and questions about general health status, was sent to all the patients. The mean followup after TUMT was 8.8 years for Program 2.0 and 2.5 years for Program 3.5.
RESULTS: At the end of follow-up, 67% of the patients treated with Program 2.0 were satisfied with the TUMT. During the follow-up period, 37% of patients experienced worsened symptoms, 18% various complications (e.g., hematuria), and 25% transient urinary-tract infection, and 16% went into retention. Secondary treatment (repeat TUMT, transurethral resection, medical therapy) was needed in 32% of patients. The mean IPSS was 13.5, and QoL score decreased to 2.1. With Program 3.5, 82% of the patients were satisfied, with another 17% having increased symptoms, 17% various complication, 25% urinary tract infection, and 26% retention. Only 7% of patients needed secondary treatment. The IPSS and QoL score went down to 11.4 and 1.6, respectively.
CONCLUSION: These long-term data show that TUMT produces durable improvement and, with its safety and low retreatment rate, presents an attractive alternative for patients with LUTS suggestive of BOO.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedChi-Square DistributionCystoscopyFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPatient SatisfactionProbabilityProstatic HyperplasiaQuality of LifeRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexSurveys and QuestionnairesTransurethral Resection of ProstateTreatment OutcomeUrinalysisUrinary Bladder Neck ObstructionUrinary Tract InfectionsUrination DisordersUrodynamics