1.Transurethral Resection of the Prostate with a Bipolar Tissue Management System Compared to Conventional Monopolar Resectoscope: One-Year Outcome.
Chang Jun YOON ; Ji Yoon KIM ; Ki Hak MOON ; Hee Chang JUNG ; Tong Choon PARK
Yonsei Medical Journal 2006;47(5):715-720
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bipolar transurethral prostatectomy (TURP) using the GyrusTM PlasmaKinetic System compared with conventional monopolar TURP. This study included 102 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) who underwent TURP from January 2003 to March 2005. In all, 49 consecutive patients had bipolar and 53 had monopolar TURP. All patients were assessed by preoperative and postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), uroflowmetry, transrectal ultrasonography, operative time, weight of resected tissue, change in serum sodium and hemoglobin, duration of catheter use, length of hospital stay, and complication rates. Significant improvement was seen postoperatively in both groups, and no difference was observed in the resection time, weight of resected tissue, change in serum sodium and hemoglobin, improvement of IPSS and peak flow rate (Qmax), or complication rates over the 12-month follow-up in both groups. There was, however, a significant difference in duration of catheter use and hospital stay. Duration of catheter use (2.28 days vs. 3.12 days) and hospital stay (3.52 days vs. 4.27 days) were shorter in the bipolar group (p = 0.012 vs. p = 0.034, respectively). Our results demonstrate that bipolar TURP using the Gyrus(TM) Plasma Kinetic System is as effective as conventional monopolar TURP with the additional advantage of reduced length of catheter use and hospital stay. Bipolar TURP is a promising new technique that may prove to be a good alternative to conventional TURP in the future.
Treatment Outcome
;
Transurethral Resection of Prostate/adverse effects/*instrumentation/methods
;
Prostatic Hyperplasia/*surgery
;
Prostate/*surgery
;
Middle Aged
;
Male
;
Humans
;
Follow-Up Studies
;
Equipment and Supplies/standards
;
Aged
2.Shovel-shaped electrode transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation versus plasmakinetic resection of the prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Lin ZHAO ; Yong-Hong MA ; Qi CHEN ; Yan-Bo CHEN ; Meng GU ; Jing-Feng GAO ; Guang-Tao ZHANG ; Jiang-Ning MOU ; Zhen-Hu BAO ; Zhong WANG
National Journal of Andrology 2018;24(2):133-137
Objective:
To compare the safety and effectiveness of shovel-shaped electrode transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) with those of plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
METHODS:
We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data about 78 BPH patients received in Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital from June 2016 to January 2017, 39 treated by shovel-shaped electrode PKEP and the other 39 by PKRP. We observed the patients for 6 months postoperatively and compared the effects and safety of the two surgical strategies.
RESULTS:
No statistically significant difference was observed between the PKEP and PKRP groups in the operation time ([69.3 ± 8.8] vs [72.2 ± 7.9] min, P = 0.126), but the former, as compared with the latter, showed a markedly less postoperative loss of hemoglobin ([3.9 ± 2.8] vs [13.9 ± 5.2] g/L, P <0.001) and shorter bladder irrigation time ([12.5 ± 1.2] vs [43.4 ± 2.8] h, P <0.001), catheterization time ([64.0 ± 4.5] vs [84.8 ± 3.0] h, P <0.001) and hospital stay ([3.1 ± 0.3] vs [5.5 ± 0.4] d, P <0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between the PKEP and PKRP groups in the postoperative maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) ([21.62 ± 1.07] vs [21.03 ± 0.96] ml/s, P = 0.12), International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) (5.85 ± 0.90 vs 6.03 ± 0.81, P = 0.279), quality of life score (QoL) (2.0 ± 0.73 vs 2.28 ± 0.72, P = 0.09), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) ([19.59 ± 6.01] vs [20.21 ± 5.16] ml, P = 0.629), or the incidence rates of urinary incontinence (2.56% [1/39] vs 7.69% [3/39], P >0.05) and other postoperative complications.
CONCLUSIONS
Both PKEP and PKRP are effective methods for the treatment of BPH, but PKEP is worthier of clinical recommendation for a better safety profile, more thorough removal of the prostate tissue, less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and better improved quality of life of the patient.
China
;
Electrodes
;
adverse effects
;
Equipment Design
;
Humans
;
Male
;
Prostatic Hyperplasia
;
surgery
;
Quality of Life
;
Retrospective Studies
;
Transurethral Resection of Prostate
;
instrumentation
;
methods
;
Treatment Outcome