Youcheng Lin1,2, Xun Wu3,4, Abai Xu1, Rui Ren5, Xueqiong Zhou6, Yong Wen1, Yong Zou1, Mancheng Gong5, Chunxiao Liu7, Zexuan Su8,9, Thomas R W Herrmann10. 1. Department of Urology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510280, China. 2. Department of Urology, Fujian Provincial Clinical College, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China. 3. Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, No. 613, HuangPu Road (West), TianHe District, Guangzhou, 510630, China. 4. Department of Anatomy, School of Basic Medicine Science, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. 5. Department of Urology and Andrology, Zhongshan City People's Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Zhongshan, China. 6. Department of Occupational Health and Occupational Medicine, School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. 7. Department of Urology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510280, China. liuchx888@163.com. 8. Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, No. 613, HuangPu Road (West), TianHe District, Guangzhou, 510630, China. suz2008@126.com. 9. Department of Anatomy, School of Basic Medicine Science, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. suz2008@126.com. 10. Department of Urology and Urological Oncology, Hanover Medical School (MHH), Carl Neuberg Str. 1, 30625, Hanover, Germany. Herrmann.Thomas@mh-hannover.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transurethral enucleation of the prostate (TUEP) versus transvesical open prostatectomy (OP) for the management of large benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TUEP and OP were identified from PubMed, Embase and Web of Science up to February 28, 2015. A meta-analysis was conducted with the STATA 12.0 software. RESULTS: Nine RCTs including 758 patients were enrolled in our meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the maximum urinary flow rate at 1, 3, 6 months, 1 and 2 years: postvoiding residual urinary volume, prostate-specific antigen, international prostate symptom score and quality of life score at 1, 3, 6 months and 1 year; or international index of erectile function at 3, 6 months and 1 year. Perioperative outcomes including hemoglobin level drop, catheter period, irrigation length and hospital stay favored TUEP, while operative time and resected prostate weight favored OP. There was significantly less blood transfusion with TUEP, but no significant differences were found in other complications such as recatheterization, urinary tract infection, reintervention for clots and bleeding control, incidence of pneumonia and infarction, transient incontinence, bladder neck contracture, urethral stricture and recurrent adenoma. CONCLUSIONS: TUEP can be performed effectively and safely with functional outcomes and complications similar to OP for large BPH, whereas it has the advantages of a shorter catheter period, shorter hospital stays and less blood transfusion. These findings seem to support TUEP as the next-generation "gold standard" of surgery for large BPH.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transurethral enucleation of the prostate (TUEP) versus transvesical open prostatectomy (OP) for the management of large benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TUEP and OP were identified from PubMed, Embase and Web of Science up to February 28, 2015. A meta-analysis was conducted with the STATA 12.0 software. RESULTS: Nine RCTs including 758 patients were enrolled in our meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the maximum urinary flow rate at 1, 3, 6 months, 1 and 2 years: postvoiding residual urinary volume, prostate-specific antigen, international prostate symptom score and quality of life score at 1, 3, 6 months and 1 year; or international index of erectile function at 3, 6 months and 1 year. Perioperative outcomes including hemoglobin level drop, catheter period, irrigation length and hospital stay favored TUEP, while operative time and resected prostate weight favored OP. There was significantly less blood transfusion with TUEP, but no significant differences were found in other complications such as recatheterization, urinary tract infection, reintervention for clots and bleeding control, incidence of pneumonia and infarction, transient incontinence, bladder neck contracture, urethral stricture and recurrent adenoma. CONCLUSIONS: TUEP can be performed effectively and safely with functional outcomes and complications similar to OP for large BPH, whereas it has the advantages of a shorter catheter period, shorter hospital stays and less blood transfusion. These findings seem to support TUEP as the next-generation "gold standard" of surgery for large BPH.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bipolar enucleation; ICBEP; International Consultation in Bipolar Enucleation of the Prostate; Large benign prostatic hyperplasia; Meta-analysis; Open prostatectomy; PKEP; Transurethral enucleation
Authors: Kevin T McVary; Claus G Roehrborn; Andrew L Avins; Michael J Barry; Reginald C Bruskewitz; Robert F Donnell; Harris E Foster; Chris M Gonzalez; Steven A Kaplan; David F Penson; James C Ulchaker; John T Wei Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-03-21 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Vincenzo Serretta; Giuseppe Morgia; Luigi Fondacaro; Gaetano Curto; Antonio Lo bianco; Domenico Pirritano; Darwin Melloni; Fausto Orestano; Mario Motta; Michele Pavone-Macaluso Journal: Urology Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Richard Naspro; Nazareno Suardi; Andrea Salonia; Vincenzo Scattoni; Giorgio Guazzoni; Renzo Colombo; Andrea Cestari; Alberto Briganti; Bruno Mazzoccoli; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2006-05-02 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Fabrizio Iacono; Domenico Prezioso; Giovanni Di Lauro; Giuseppe Romeo; Antonio Ruffo; Ester Illiano; Bruno Amato Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2012-11-15 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Benoit Peyronnet; Vincent Misrai; Tev Aho; Henry Woo; Thomas Herrmann; Fernando Gomez-Sancha Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-04-28 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: J Curtis Nickel; Lorne Aaron; Jack Barkin; Dean Elterman; Mahmoud Nachabé; Kevin C Zorn Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 1.862