Comparison of Treatment Outcomes between Photoselective Vaporization and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.
10.4111/kju.2007.48.3.297
- Author:
Jin Sung PARK
1
;
Gyeong Eun MIN
;
Chang Hee YOU
;
Bumsik HONG
;
Choung Soo KIM
;
Hanjong AHN
;
Tai Young AHN
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. tyahn@amc.seoul.kr
- Publication Type:Clinical Trial ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Vaporization;
Transurethral resection of prostate;
Benign prostatic hyperplasia;
Laser surgery
- MeSH:
Catheters;
Hemorrhage;
Humans;
Laser Therapy;
Length of Stay;
Operative Time;
Prospective Studies;
Prostate*;
Prostatic Hyperplasia*;
Quality of Life;
Residual Volume;
Transurethral Resection of Prostate;
Volatilization*
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2007;48(3):297-303
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: We prospectively compared the treatment outcomes of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) with those of the gold standard transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between October 2004 and April 2006, a prospective clinical trial was performed with 131 and 41 patients treated by PVP and TURP, respectively. The efficacy of the two procedures were compared in terms of the International Prostate Symptom Score, quality of life score, peak urinary flow rate, postvoid residual volume, complications and perioperative outcomes at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months following treatment. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. The operative times, catheter indwelling times and hospital stays were significantly shorter in the PVP group. All efficacy parameters were significantly improved in both groups compared to those obtained preoperatively. In addition, the degrees of improvement in the efficacy parameters were similar between the two groups within 12 months. With respect to the prostatic volume reduction, the difference between the pre- and post-PVP volumes during the study period was less than that of the TURP group (p<0.001). There were no differences in the overall complications between the two groups, with the exception of more common bleeding reguiring a transfusion and capsule perforation in the TURP group. CONCLUSIONS: PVP provides excellent intraoperative and postoperative safety, and facilitates immediate relief from obstructive voiding symptoms; similarly to TURP, but has the advantages of shorter hospital stays and catheter indwelling times. The short-term treatment outcomes 12 months after PVP and TURP were comparable, with the exception of the prostatic volume reduction.
