• Journal of endourology · Apr 2001

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial

    Randomized study of transurethral resection of the prostate and combined transurethral resection and vaporization of the prostate as a therapeutic alternative in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

    • S Küpeli, E Yilmaz, T Soygür, and M Budak.
    • Department of Urology, Ankara University, Medical Faculty, Ibni Sina Hospital, Turkey.
    • J. Endourol. 2001 Apr 1; 15 (3): 317-21.

    Background And PurposeIn recent years, various minimally invasive alternatives to transurethral resection have become available for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Transurethral electrovaporization has become popular, with reported improvements in subjective and objectives measures, but a high rate of postoperative irritative symptoms and lack of tissue for histologic examination are the two most commonly reported disadvantages of this procedure. To decrease the postoperative irritative symptoms while minimizing intraoperative and postoperative bleeding and also to obtain tissue samples, we have combined the techniques of vaporization, which was termed "vapor-cut." The aim of this randomized study was to compare the efficacy and safety of vapor-cut with those of the gold standard, transurethral resection.Patients And MethodsA series of 100 consecutive men (mean age 63.5 +/- 3.4 years) with moderate to severe symptoms of prostatism were randomized to receive transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or vapor-cut since November 1997. Adverse events during the procedure, including serial changes in both serum hematocrit and sodium and postoperative irritative symptoms, were recorded after removal of the urethral catheter. Preoperative and postoperative symptom scores and maximum flow rates (Qmax) were obtained from all patients. The volume of the prostate was measured preoperatively and postoperatively using transrectal ultrasonography. The mean follow-up of the patients was 6.7 months (range 6-10 months).ResultsThe mean operative times for the vapor-cut group and the TURP group were 48.2 minutes and 42.7 minutes, respectively (P > 0.05). In the TURP group and the vapor-cut group, the International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS) decreased from 21.6 to 5.0 (P < 0.01) and from 19.4 to 4.0 (P < 0.01), respectively, at 6 months. The Qmax increased from 9.2 +/- 2.6 mL/sec to 24.6 +/- 3.4 mL/sec (P < 0.01) in the TURP group and from 7.9 +/- 2.1 mL/sec to 26.7 +/- 3.7 mL/sec (P < 0.01) in the vapor-cut group. The mean reductions in the weight of the prostate were 49.8% in the TURP group (P < 0.05) and 53.6% in the vapor-cut group (P < 0.05). Both catheterization time and hospital stay were significantly shorter for the vapor-cut group (P < 0.05). The decreases in the mean serum sodium concentration were statistically insignificant in both groups. However, the decrease in the mean hematocrit was statistically significant in the TURP group but not in the vapor-cut group. No patient in either group had the transurethral resection syndrome or required blood transfusion. After removal of the urethral catheter, irritative voiding symptoms, usually associated with frequency, were greater in those patients treated with TURP than in those having vapor-cut. None of the patients demonstrated sphincteric incontinence, bladder neck contracture, or urethral stricture.ConclusionFrom our preliminary experience, vapor-cut seems to give results comparable to those of TURP. Because there is almost no bleeding during vapor-cut, the procedure is performed under excellent visibility, which permits more rapid and effective resection.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.