Literature DB >> 12581006

Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate: is it any better than conventional transurethral resection of the prostate?

W J McAllister1, O Karim, R O Plail, D R Samra, M J Steggall, Q Yang, C G Fowler.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP), compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), as a treatment for men with symptomatic benign prostatic enlargement (BPE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 235 men with symptomatic BPE in four hospitals in the South-East of England were randomized to TUVP (115) and TURP (120). Patients were assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the Short Form-36 (SF-36), EuroQol and sexual function questionnaire, uroflowmetry, ultrasonographic measurement of residual urine volume, pressure-flow urodynamics and transrectal ultrasonography.
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the objective and subjective outcome after TURP and TUVP. The latter was associated with a lower transfusion rate than TURP but this did not result in an overall reduction in complications. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay. Overall, the two operations produced equivalent results and equivalent complication rates.
CONCLUSION: TUVP is an effective treatment for symptomatic BPE, with results equivalent to TURP. TUVP has not led to the expected reduction in early postoperative morbidity or shorter hospital stays.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12581006     DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04073.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  7 in total

1.  2010 Update: Guidelines for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Authors:  J Curtis Nickel; Carlos E Méndez-Probst; Thomas F Whelan; Ryan F Paterson; Hassan Razvi
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  The role of the bipolar plasmakinetic TURP over 100 g prostate in the elderly patients.

Authors:  Enis Rauf Coskuner; Tayyar Alp Ozkan; Sefik Koprulu; Ozdal Dillioglugil; Ibrahim Cevik
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  A clinical study comparing BIVAP saline vaporization of the prostate with bipolar TURP in patients with prostate volume 30 to 80 mL: Early complications, physiological changes and postoperative follow-up outcomes.

Authors:  Ozgu Aydogdu; Ayhan Karakose; Yusuf Ziya Atesci
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Reasons to believe in vaporization: a review of the benefits of photo-selective and transurethral vaporization.

Authors:  Russell N Schwartz; Felix Couture; Iman Sadri; Adel Arezki; David-Dan Nguyen; Ahmed S Zakaria; Kyle Law; Dean Elterman; Malte Rieken; Hannes Cash; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Energy delivery systems for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2006-08-01

Review 6.  Minimally invasive surgical therapies for benign prostatic hypertrophy: The rise in minimally invasive surgical therapies.

Authors:  Daniel Christidis; Shannon McGrath; Marlon Perera; Todd Manning; Damien Bolton; Nathan Lawrentschuk
Journal:  Prostate Int       Date:  2017-01-19

7.  A prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing bipolar plasma kinetic resection of the prostate versus conventional monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Authors:  Christopher Ho Chee Kong; M Fadzli Ibrahim; Zulkifli Md Zainuddin
Journal:  Ann Saudi Med       Date:  2009 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.526

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.