Effect of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Based on the Degree of Obstruction Seen in Urodynamic Study.
10.4111/kju.2013.54.12.840
- Author:
Dong Suk MIN
1
;
Hee Ju CHO
;
Jung Yoon KANG
;
Tag Keun YOO
;
Jeong Man CHO
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Eulji General Hospital, Eulji University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. uro02@eulji.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Prostate;
Transurethral resection of prostate;
Urodynamics
- MeSH:
Humans;
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms;
Prostate*;
Prostatic Hyperplasia;
Quality of Life;
Retrospective Studies;
Transurethral Resection of Prostate;
Urodynamics*
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2013;54(12):840-845
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: We retrospectively investigated the effect of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) on the basis of the degree of obstruction seen in preoperative urodynamic study in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) who complained of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects of this study were 285 patients who were diagnosed with BPH with LUTS and who subsequently underwent TURP. The Abrams-Griffiths number was calculated from the urodynamic results to divide the patients into the following groups: unobstructed, equivocal, and obstructed. There were 26 patients (9.1%) in the unobstructed group, 98 patients (34.4%) in the equivocal group, and 161 patients (56.5%) in the obstructed group. The preoperative and postoperative uroflowmetry, residual urine, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and quality of life (QoL) score were compared between the three groups to evaluate the outcome of the treatment. RESULTS: The reduction in the IPSS was 14.4 in the obstructed group, which was higher than the reductions of 12.7 in the equivocal group and 9.5 in the unobstructed group, but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.227). The QoL score was also not significantly different across the three groups (p=0.533). The postoperative maximum flow rate was significantly improved in all three groups. The obstructed group had an improvement of 7.8+/-7.2 mL/s, which was higher than the improvement of 3.7+/-6.2 mL/s in the unobstructed group (p=0.049) but was not significantly different from the improvement of 5.6+/-6.9 mL/s in the equivocal group (p=0.141). CONCLUSIONS: TURP led to an improvement in the maximum flow rate and LUTS even in BPH patients without BOO. Therefore, TURP can be expected to improve LUTS in BPH patients without definite urodynamic obstruction.
