BACKGROUND: Few studies have focused on clinical findings in prostate cancer patients receiving transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for acute urinary retention (AUR). We compared the clinical findings (preoperative characteristics, operative morbidities, and pathology results) of patients with diagnosed prostate cancer undergoing palliative TURP for AUR with those of patients undergoing TURP for AUR who were diagnosed with prostate cancer postoperatively. METHODS: The charts of 25 patients with prostate cancer undergoing TURP for AUR between 1986 and 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. Fourteen patients underwent palliative TURP (group A) and the other 11 patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer received TURP (group B). The data, including preoperative characteristics, operative morbidities, and pathology results were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in parameters such as age at diagnosis and operation, operative time, hospitalization, and catheter duration. However, the Gleason score was higher in group A (7.6 +/- 1.7) than in group B (5.4 +/- 1.8) (p < 0.005). The mean resected weight was lower in group A (19.9 g) than in group B (39.5 g). Group A was more likely to receive recatheterization (33.3% vs 0%, p = 0.058) and repeat operation (28.6%), although the difference was not statistically significant. There were no complications such as transurethral resection syndrome or perioperative death in either group. CONCLUSION: TURP can be performed safely for relief of AUR in patients with prostate cancer, no matter if the cancer was diagnosed before or after surgery. The higher Gleason score and more advanced cancer stage, as found in group A, may correlate to high recatheterization and reoperation rates due to preexisting tumor progression.
BACKGROUND: Few studies have focused on clinical findings in prostate cancerpatients receiving transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for acute urinary retention (AUR). We compared the clinical findings (preoperative characteristics, operative morbidities, and pathology results) of patients with diagnosed prostate cancer undergoing palliative TURP for AUR with those of patients undergoing TURP for AUR who were diagnosed with prostate cancer postoperatively. METHODS: The charts of 25 patients with prostate cancer undergoing TURP for AUR between 1986 and 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. Fourteen patients underwent palliative TURP (group A) and the other 11 patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer received TURP (group B). The data, including preoperative characteristics, operative morbidities, and pathology results were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in parameters such as age at diagnosis and operation, operative time, hospitalization, and catheter duration. However, the Gleason score was higher in group A (7.6 +/- 1.7) than in group B (5.4 +/- 1.8) (p < 0.005). The mean resected weight was lower in group A (19.9 g) than in group B (39.5 g). Group A was more likely to receive recatheterization (33.3% vs 0%, p = 0.058) and repeat operation (28.6%), although the difference was not statistically significant. There were no complications such as transurethral resection syndrome or perioperative death in either group. CONCLUSION: TURP can be performed safely for relief of AUR in patients with prostate cancer, no matter if the cancer was diagnosed before or after surgery. The higher Gleason score and more advanced cancer stage, as found in group A, may correlate to high recatheterization and reoperation rates due to preexisting tumor progression.
Authors: Juan P Rojas-Manrique; Angie Ramírez Ramírez; Luis Miguel Becerra Méndez; Jose G Ramos Ulloa; Carlos Riveros; Rodolfo Varela Ramirez Journal: Cureus Date: 2019-09-24