Introduction:Transurethral resection of the prostate has been considered as the gold standard for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). LASER enucleation procedures have emerged as a size-independent gold standard. The flip side of LASER procedures is the initial cost of investment and a long learning curve. Transurethral enucleation with bipolar (TUEB) has emerged as an alternative prostatic enucleation procedure. We present our initial experience in TUEB.Materials and Methods:Fifty patients with BPH and indications for surgery underwent TUEB from December 2014 to October 2015. Patients with prostate size >40 g were selected. All surgeries were done by a single urologist. Various parameters such as preoperative and postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) scores, Qmax (peak flow) scores, duration of surgery, duration of enucleation, drop in hemoglobin, postoperative pain scores, weight of morcellated tissue, and the incidence of stress urinary incontinence were measured.Results:The mean age was 58 years and mean prostatic size was 84 g. Sixteen patients had refractory urinary retention. The mean IPSS score in remaining patients was 24.5. The mean preoperative maximal flow rate (Qmax) on uroflowmetry was 9.3 mL/s. The mean overall duration of surgery was 83 min. The mean drop in hemoglobin was 0.9 g/dl. The mean postoperative pain scores at 12 and 24 h after surgery were 2.1 and 1.3. The mean weight of morcellated tissue was 48 g. Twenty-six patients had de novo transient stress urinary incontinence after surgery. The mean IPSS score after TUEB was 8.3 showing significant improvement in all aspects of IPSS. The mean post-TUEB Qmax on uroflowmetry was 25 mL/s.Conclusions:TUEB is an effective surgical management of BPH. TUEB allows enucleation of large adenomas in a single sitting, mimicking conventional open enucleation of the prostate while having all the advantages of a minimally invasive surgery.

No abstract

Table 1: The table shows the relative proportion of NMSC in males and females vis-à-vis the 10 leading sites of cancer in our registry Site name Relative proportion in males (%) Site name Relative proportion in females (%)

No abstract