Literature DB >> 17058610

[Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: peroperative analysis of the results].

J M Abascal Junquera1, L Cecchini Rosell, C Salvador Lacambra, R Martos Calvo, A Celma Domenech, J Morote Robles.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the differences in the postoperative period between bipolar and monopolar resection of the prostate in the endoscopic surgery of the benign prostatic hyperplasia.
METHODS: 45 patients were prospectively randomized. Twenty-one underwent monopolar resection (Storz Ch 26, 30 degrees) and 24 underwent bipolar resection (Olympus ch 26, 30 degrees).
RESULTS: Mean age in the bipolar group was 69,5 years versus 67,3 in the monopolar group; mean flow before surgery (7,7 ml/s vs 7,2 ml/s); ecographic prostate volume (39,5 cc vs 42,7 cc); resection volume 13 g vs 12,6 g and mean resection time was 39,7 vs 42,5 min. Cut capacity was considered notable-excellent in 90% of the patients in the bipolar group vs 50% in the monopolar group (p=0,01); adherence of fragments were considered abundant or very abundant in 0% vs 60% (p=0,01); coagulation capacity was excellent-notable in 25% vs 75% (p=0,03). There were no significant differences on the days of catheterization (2,92 vs 3,1), continuous irrigation (1,79 vs 2,05), hospitalization (3,63 vs 3,67), hematocrite descent (3,48 vs 3,32) and plasmatic sodium (0,52 vs 1,16), neither on episodes of acute urine retention (only one patient in the monopolar group).
CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, TURP with SurgMaster resector in prostate smaller than 70 g offers better peroperative qualities for the surgeon (better cut capacity, less adherence of fragments) than the monopolar resection, with similar postoperative outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17058610     DOI: 10.1016/s0210-4806(06)73515-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Actas Urol Esp        ISSN: 0210-4806            Impact factor:   0.994


  7 in total

Review 1.  Bipolar transurethral resection versus monopolar transurethral resection for benign prostatic hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yin Tang; Jinhong Li; Chuanxiao Pu; YunJin Bai; HaiChao Yuan; Qiang Wei; Ping Han
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2014-06-05       Impact factor: 2.942

Review 2.  A Review Comparing Experience and Results with Bipolar Versus Monopolar Resection for Treatment of Bladder Tumors.

Authors:  Yasser Osman; Ahmed M Harraz
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  In-hospital outcomes and cost assessment between bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate.

Authors:  Toru Sugihara; Hideo Yasunaga; Hiromasa Horiguchi; Mitsuhiro Nakamura; Hiroaki Nishimatsu; Haruki Kume; Kazuhiko Ohe; Shinya Matsuda; Yukio Homma
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-03-19       Impact factor: 2.942

4.  A prospective randomized study comparing bipolar plasmakinetic transurethral resection of the prostate and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: efficacy, sexual function, Quality of Life, and complications.

Authors:  Hugo Otaola-Arca; Manuel Álvarez-Ardura; Roberto Molina-Escudero; Mario I Fernández; Álvaro Páez-Borda
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2021 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

5.  Bipolar resection of the bladder and prostate--initial experience with a newly developed regular sized loop resectoscope.

Authors:  Thorsten Bach; Thomas R W Herrmann; Christian Cellarius; Bogdan Geavlete; Andreas J Gross; Marian Jecu
Journal:  J Med Life       Date:  2009 Oct-Dec

6.  Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction.

Authors:  Cameron Edwin Alexander; Malo Mf Scullion; Muhammad Imran Omar; Yuhong Yuan; Charalampos Mamoulakis; James Mo N'Dow; Changhao Chen; Thomas Bl Lam
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-12-03

Review 7.  The TURis System for Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance.

Authors:  Andrew Cleves; Paul Dimmock; Neil Hewitt; Grace Carolan-Rees
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 2.561

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.