A Prospective, Randomised Trial Comparing Plasmakinetic Enucleation to Standard Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Three-year Follow-up Results

Zhao, Zhigang; Zeng, Guohua; Zhong, Wen; Mai, Zanlin; Zeng, Shaohua; Tao, Xuguang Grant

doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2010.08.026

Cited by 100 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, we did not include transrectal ultrasonographic prostate volumes at follow-up or sexual functions. However, in their 3-year follow-up report, Zhao et al [13] showed changes in ultrasonographic prostate volume and sexual function.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[16] Autorino et al [11] observed that after 4 years, urethral stricture occurred at a rate of 6.2% after M-TURP and 3% after P-TURP. Zhao et al [13] reported that after 3 years urethral stricture occurred at a rate of 2.9% after M-TURP, whereas no stricture was encountered in their series treated with P-TURP. Muslumanoglu et al [12] reported similar rates of strictures after a follow-up of 100 months.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After a follow-up of 100 months, Muslumanoglu et al [12] emphasized the reliability of the P-TURP compared with monopolar TURP. In another study, Zhao et al [13] reported that after 3 years of follow-up, the clinical efficacy of P-TURP was durable and compared favorably with M-TURP. In our study, there was no statistically significant difference between the M-TURP and the P-TURP groups in IPSS or Qmax values at the 4-and 7-year follow-up.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative outcomes of plasmakinetic versus monopolar transurethral resection of benign prostatic hyperplasia: 7 years' results

Erturhan

Bayrak

Şeçkiner

et al. 2013

Turkish Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We compared results from the standard monopolar or the bipolar plasmakinetic method for the transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) at 4 and 7 years after surgery (medium to long term). Material and methods:A retrospective analysis was performed on the complete data from 124 patients who were alive and had 7 years of regular follow-up. Of those 124 patients with BPH, 65 (52%) underwent monopolar TURP (M-TURP) and 59 (48%) underwent plasmakinetic TURP (P-TURP). During the followup period, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the maximal flow rate (Qmax) measured using uroflowmetry and the prostate specific antigen (PSA) values were recorded. Patients in whom alpha blockers were administered due to the growth of postoperative adenoma and who had been operated on due to urethral stricture, bladder neck contracture or a growing adenoma were also noted and recorded.Results: There was no statistically significant difference between M-TURP and P-TURP groups in any pre-operative or post-operative follow-up parameter at 4 or 7 years post-surgery. Specifically, PSA, IPSS and Qmax values; urethrotomies performed; alpha-blocker use; and the frequency of re-operations were statistically insignificant (p>0.05). Conclusion:Our study demonstrated that when medium-to long-term results are compared, P-TURP and M-TURP appear to result in similar IPSS scores, Qmax values, complication rates and retreatment rates. Larger prospective studies are required to corroborate these results.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative outcomes of plasmakinetic versus monopolar transurethral resection of benign prostatic hyperplasia: 7 years' results

Erturhan

Bayrak

Şeçkiner

et al. 2013

Turkish Journal of Urology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1,2 Conventional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) still remains the gold standard for the surgical management of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) caused by BPH, particularly in the patients with a prostate volume of <100 mL. 3,4 Nevertheless, significant complications remain associated with TURP and the general morbidity rate of TURP is 18% and the overall mortality rate ranges between 0.17% and 0.77%.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3,[5][6][7][8][9][10] Due to significant complication rates observed following TURP, several studies have evaluated the safety and efficacy of new surgical techniques to potentially minimize the risks of TURP to treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) resulting from BPH. [1][2][3][4] Recent trials investigating for the optimal surgical treatment for BPH compare different modalities in terms of minimal invasiveness, postoperative complications, physiological changes and outcomes. [1][2][3][4] Bipolar TURP and BIVAP saline vaporization of the prostate are common minimally invasive surgical methods to treat BPH.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A clinical study comparing BIVAP saline vaporization of the prostate with bipolar TURP: Early complications, physiological changes and postoperative follow-up outcomes

Aydoğdu

Karakose

Atesci

2014

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cite as: Can Urol Assoc J 2014;8(7-8):e485-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.1772 Published online July 18, 2014. Abstract Introduction:We compare BIVAP saline vaporization of the prostate with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Methods: In total, we included 86 patients treated with BIVAP (n = 44) and bipolar TURP (n = 42). The inclusion criteria were maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) ≤10 mL/s, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) ≥16, and prostate volume measured with transrectal ultrasound scan between 30 and 80 mL. Serum electrolyte, hemoglobin, and hematocrit levels were determined preoperatively and postoperatively. All patients were evaluated at the postoperative first and third months and the IPSS score, post-void residual urinary volume (PVR), Qmax, and average urinary flow rate (Qave) were compared. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 16.0 program and statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: Preoperative demographic characteristics were similar in the 2 groups. The mean operation time was significantly higher (p = 0.02) and hospitalization time was significantly lower (p = 0.04) in the BIVAP group when compared to the bipolar TURP group. There was no significant difference between 2 groups in terms of preoperative and postoperative serum electrolyte, hemoglobin and hematocrit levels. Postoperative complication rates were similar in the 2 groups. The only exception was the rate of severe dysuria, which was significantly higher in the BIVAP group. No statistical difference was noted between the groups in terms of postoperative follow-up results. Conclusion: Bipolar TURP is a safe and highly effective technique which can be used in the surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction with minimal side effects. BIVAP saline vaporization of the prostate seems to be a potential alternative to bipolar TURP with shorter hospitalization time.

show abstract

Measurement of post‐void residual urine

Asimakopoulos

Nunzio

Kocjancic

et al. 2014

Neurourology and Urodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Prospective, Randomised Trial Comparing Plasmakinetic Enucleation to Standard Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Three-year Follow-up Results

Cited by 100 publications

References 15 publications

Comparative outcomes of plasmakinetic versus monopolar transurethral resection of benign prostatic hyperplasia: 7 years' results

Comparative outcomes of plasmakinetic versus monopolar transurethral resection of benign prostatic hyperplasia: 7 years' results

A clinical study comparing BIVAP saline vaporization of the prostate with bipolar TURP: Early complications, physiological changes and postoperative follow-up outcomes

Measurement of post‐void residual urine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About