INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive methods, especially the novel techniques, gain more and more popularity in benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) treatment. Transurethral ethanol injection is one of these novel methods as it is easy to apply for BPH treatment and quite successful. The present study evaluates the results of a single-year transurethral ethanol injection prostate (TUEP) follow-up employed for the first time in our country. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with lower urinary tract symptoms underwent TUEP. It was performed in ten patients under local anesthesia and in 42 patients under sedation. Dehydrated ethanol with a concentration of 95-98 % was injected using transurethral approach with a rigid cystoscope. Forty-two patients were followed for 1 year. RESULTS: At the end of the first year, the average patients' IPSS scores decreased from 22.6 to 12.8 and prostate volume from 49.5 to 38.8 cc. Q-average increased from 3.3 to 7.1 ml/s and Qmax from 6.4 to 9.7 ml/s. Residual urine decreased from 160.1 ml to 68 cc. There were not any dire postoperative complications. In 77.8 % of the patients, TUEP succeeded. In 13.8 % of the patients, alternative treatment methods were to be employed. CONCLUSION: TUEP, an effective minimally invasive treatment option, can be performed with medically high-risk BPH patients under regional anesthesia. The procedure is easy, inexpensive, safe, and rapid to us. Yet, long-term and multi-centered studies with larger patient series are needed to define further benefits.
INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive methods, especially the novel techniques, gain more and more popularity in benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) treatment. Transurethral ethanol injection is one of these novel methods as it is easy to apply for BPH treatment and quite successful. The present study evaluates the results of a single-year transurethral ethanol injection prostate (TUEP) follow-up employed for the first time in our country. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with lower urinary tract symptoms underwent TUEP. It was performed in ten patients under local anesthesia and in 42 patients under sedation. Dehydrated ethanol with a concentration of 95-98 % was injected using transurethral approach with a rigid cystoscope. Forty-two patients were followed for 1 year. RESULTS: At the end of the first year, the average patients' IPSS scores decreased from 22.6 to 12.8 and prostate volume from 49.5 to 38.8 cc. Q-average increased from 3.3 to 7.1 ml/s and Qmax from 6.4 to 9.7 ml/s. Residual urine decreased from 160.1 ml to 68 cc. There were not any dire postoperative complications. In 77.8 % of the patients, TUEP succeeded. In 13.8 % of the patients, alternative treatment methods were to be employed. CONCLUSION: TUEP, an effective minimally invasive treatment option, can be performed with medically high-risk BPH patients under regional anesthesia. The procedure is easy, inexpensive, safe, and rapid to us. Yet, long-term and multi-centered studies with larger patient series are needed to define further benefits.
Authors: Sascha A Ahyai; Peter Gilling; Steven A Kaplan; Rainer M Kuntz; Stephan Madersbacher; Francesco Montorsi; Mark J Speakman; Christian G Stief Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-06-11 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: M K Plante; M L Bunnell; S J Trotter; T L Jackson; A C Esenler; P Zvara Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2002 Impact factor: 5.554