Objective To compare the clinical effect between retropubic extraperitoneal laparoscopic prostatectomy with prostatic urethra preservation and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for giant benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).MethodsThe clinical data and follow-up of 128 cases of giant BPH were analyzed retrospectively.Seventy-two cases underwent TURP (TURP group) and 56 cases underwent retropubic extraperitoneal laparoscopic prostatectomy with prostatic urethra preservation ( laparoscopic group ).The operation time,blood loss,gland mass excision,bladder washing time,catheterization time,hospital stay,hospital cost,international prostate symptoms score (IPSS) and quality of life questionnaires (QOL),maximum flow rate (MFR),residual urine volume (RUV) were compared between two groups.ResultsThe bladder washing time,catheterization time,hospital stay in laparoscopic group were less than those in TURP group[0 d vs.(2.8 ± 1.2) d,(2.3 ± 0.6) d vs.(5.2 ± 1.5) d,(4.2 ± 0.5) d vs.(7.5 ±0.5) d],gland mass excision in laparoscopic group was more than that in TURP group [(100.2 ±25.4) g vs.(85.6 ± 15.5) g],there were significant differences between two groups(P＜ 0.05).There was no significant difference in the operation time,blood loss,hospital cost between two groups (P ＞ 0.05).There were significant differences in IPSS,QOL,RUV and MRF before and after 3,6 months treatment for two groups [ laparoscopic group:(9.1 ± 3.4),(7.5 ± 2.5 ) scores vs.(27.5 ± 5.8) scores,( 1.8 ± 1.1 ),( 1.6 ± 0.8)scores vs. (5.5 t0.5) scores,(26.5 ± 11.5),(22.4 ± 12.6) ml vs. (145.0 ±48.0) ml,(17.6 ±8.4),(20.2 ± 5.4) ml/s vs.(8.3 ± 3.5) ml/s;TURP group:(9.2 ± 3.8),(7.8 ± 2.2) scores vs.(28.5 ± 5.4) scores,( 1.9 ± 1.2),( 1.7 ± 0.6) scores vs.(5.0 ± 0.5 ) scores,(28.5 ± 12.9),(23.0 ± 11.7) ml vs. ( 155.0 ± 47.0) ml,( 17.8 ± 9.2),( 19.8 ± 4.5 ) ml/s vs.(7.2 ± 3.2 ) ml/s ] (P ＜ 0.01 ),but there was no significant difference between two groups (P ＞ 0.05).ConclusionsThe clinical effect of two microtrauma surgery are good.Laparoscopic technique is a feasible treatment option for patients suffered from giant BPH for which has the benefit of a quicker recovery,shorter hospital stay,less complications,no bladder washing.