OBJECTIVES: To compare the early follow-up and perioperative morbidity of photoselective vaporization (PVP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients (pts.) suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIAL AND METHOD: 101 pts. underwent PVP (n = 64) and TURP (n = 37) in a prospective, non-randomized bi-centre trial. Inclusion criteria were identical at both centres. Primary outcome parameters were maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)), post-void residual volume (V(res)), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Secondary outcomes included intraoperative surgical parameters and perioperative and post-discharge morbidity. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of both groups were similar. Operating time was slightly shorter in the TURP group (p = 0.047). During TURP significant more irrigation solution was used (p < 0.001). Decrease of serum haemoglobin (p = 0.027) and serum sodium (p = 0.013) was larger after TURP. Catheter drainage was removed significant earlier after PVP than after TURP (p < 0.001). Outcome of Q(max), and IPSS were similar in both groups within 6 months. The sort of perioperative complications was different in both groups, however overall cumulative perioperative morbidity was comparable (PVP 39.1% versus TURP 43.2.1%; ns). CONCLUSION: PVP provides excellent intraoperative safety, instant tissue removal, and immediate relief from obstructive voiding symptoms, similar to TURP. Early outcomes 6-months after PVP and TURP are comparable.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the early follow-up and perioperative morbidity of photoselective vaporization (PVP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients (pts.) suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIAL AND METHOD: 101 pts. underwent PVP (n = 64) and TURP (n = 37) in a prospective, non-randomized bi-centre trial. Inclusion criteria were identical at both centres. Primary outcome parameters were maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)), post-void residual volume (V(res)), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Secondary outcomes included intraoperative surgical parameters and perioperative and post-discharge morbidity. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of both groups were similar. Operating time was slightly shorter in the TURP group (p = 0.047). During TURP significant more irrigation solution was used (p < 0.001). Decrease of serum haemoglobin (p = 0.027) and serum sodium (p = 0.013) was larger after TURP. Catheter drainage was removed significant earlier after PVP than after TURP (p < 0.001). Outcome of Q(max), and IPSS were similar in both groups within 6 months. The sort of perioperative complications was different in both groups, however overall cumulative perioperative morbidity was comparable (PVP 39.1% versus TURP 43.2.1%; ns). CONCLUSION: PVP provides excellent intraoperative safety, instant tissue removal, and immediate relief from obstructive voiding symptoms, similar to TURP. Early outcomes 6-months after PVP and TURP are comparable.
Authors: Felix Wezel; Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl; Nina Huck; Thorsten Bach; Christel Weiss; Maurice Stephan Michel; Axel Häcker Journal: World J Urol Date: 2009-12-25 Impact factor: 4.226