OBJECTIVETo compare the effectiveness and safety of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and transurethral enucleative resection of the prostate (TUERP) in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODSA total of 630 BPH patients with indication of surgery were randomly assigned to receive TURP (n = 305) and TUERP (n = 325), respectively. There were no significant differences preoperatively in age, prostate volume, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and Qmax between the two groups (P > 0.05). The prostate resection rate, operation time, postoperative complications, and quality of life (QOL) of the patients were recorded and statistically analyzed.

RESULTSCompared with TURP, TUERP showed a significantly higher rate of prostate resection ([47.0 +/- 13.3] vs [60.1 +/- 12.3]%, P < 0.05), shorter operation time ([57.9 +/- 15.9] vs [40.4 +/- 14.2] min, P < 0.05), and shorter bladder irrigation time ([2.7 +/- 0.6] vs [2.2 + 1.1] d, P < 0.05). Significant differences were found between the pre- and post-operative levels of serum sodium and hemoglobin in the TURP group ([141.2 +/- 3.5 ] vs [136.9 +/- 4.7] mmol/L, P < 0.01; [137.6 +/- 8.8] vs [124.8 +/- 9.6] g/L, P < 0.01), but not in the TUERP group. Three months after operation, IPSS, QOL, and Qmax were all markedly improved in both groups (P < 0.01), but with no significant differences between the two groups (P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONTUERP is better than TURP in the treatment of BPH for its advantages of higher resection rate of the prostate, shorter operation time and bladder irrigation time, less intraoperative blood loss, fewer postoperative complications, and faster recovery.