Giant prostatic hyperplasia: report of a previously asymptomatic man presenting with gross hematuria and hypovolemic shock

Wroclawski, Marcelo Langer; Carneiro, Ariê; Tristão, Rodrigo Alves; Sakuramoto, Paulo Kouiti; Youssef, Jorg Daoud Merched; Neto, Antônio Corrêa Lopes; Santiago, Lucila Heloísa Simardi; Pompeo, Antônio Carlos Lima

doi:10.1590/s1679-45082015rc2905

Cited by 17 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, complications were typically easy to handle (Clavien 1 or 2), and there was only one case of Clavien 4 complication. In the past, given the lack of standardisation of complications, these events would likely not have been counted as complications of TURP and prostatectomy series, and can explain the lower incidence reported in previous publications ( 16 , 17 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Open suprapubic versus retropubic prostatectomy in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia during resident's learning curve: a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:This study compared the suprapubic (SP) versus retropubic (RP) prostatectomy for the treatment of large prostates and evaluated perioperative surgical morbidity and improvement of urinary symptoms.Materials and Methods:In this single centre, prospective, randomised study, 65 consecutive patients with LUTS and surgical indication with prostate volume greater than 75g underwent open prostatectomy to compare the RP (32 patients) versus SP (33 patients) technique. Results: The SP group exhibited a higher incidence of complications (p=0.002). Regarding voiding pattern analysis (IPSS and flowmetry), both were significantly effective compared to pre-treatment baseline. The RP group parameters were significantly better, with higher peak urinary flow (SP: 16.77 versus RP: 23.03mL/s, p=0.008) and a trend of lower IPSS score (SP: 6.67 versus RP 4.14, p=0.06). In a subgroup evaluation of patients with prostate volumes larger than 100g, blood loss was lower in those undergoing SP prostatectomy (p=0.003). Patients with prostates smaller than 100g in the SP group exhibited a higher incidence of low grade late complications (p=0.004).Conclusions:The SP technique was related to a higher incidence of minor complications in the late postoperative period. High volume prostates were associated with increased bleeding when the RP technique was utilized. The RP prostatectomy was associated with higher peak urinary flow and a trend of a lower IPSS Score.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Open suprapubic versus retropubic prostatectomy in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia during resident's learning curve: a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most cases of LUTS due to BPH are initially managed through medical therapy. Repeated urinary tract infections, massive haematuria, bladder stones, urinary retention, upper urinary tract involvement with renal function deterioration, and medical treatment failure or intolerance are the most frequent surgical indications (Wroclawski, Carneiro, Tristão, et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: The next gold standard? No! (or not yet!)

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most cases of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia are initially managed through medical therapy. In cases that surgery is indicated, the anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (aEEP), first described in 1983, allegedly presents the same safety profile as the best endoscopic non-enucleating procedures and the same long-term functional outcomes as simple prostatectomy. Thus, why aEEP has not yet been consolidated as the gold-standard BPH surgical treatment? The main reasons are as follows: (a) Multiple energy sources and techniques; (b) High costs; (c) Steep learning curve; (d) Rare in-residency training; (e) Reimbursement issues; (f) Outcomes and (g) Complications. We do believe aEEP is an important advance and a "practice-changing" procedure that will play an important role in the BPH surgical options arsenal, especially for larger prostates. However, there is a need to start an in-residency training program, with a mentor guidance, and, over time, the cost will likely be reduced due to greater competition between companies and greater support from health insurers. Considering these points, in the future, EEP may be considered the gold-standard treatment for BPH… but not yet. K E Y W O R D S endoscopic surgical procedure, prostate, prostatic hyperplasia, standard of care, urologic surgical procedures How to cite this article: Wroclawski ML, Teles SB, Carneiro A. Anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: The next gold standard? No! (or not yet!). Andrologia.

show abstract

“…For many years, TURP is still considered gold standard for the small/medium prostates and open prostatectomy [ 26 ] was the most appropriate choice for men with large gland volumes. However, TURP is still accompanied by some life-threatening risks, such as a 2% to 4.8% rate of hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion, [ 27 ] and elevated morbidity occurred in open prostatectomy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoscopic enucleation vs endoscopic vaporization procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia: how should we choose

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Giant prostatic hyperplasia: report of a previously asymptomatic man presenting with gross hematuria and hypovolemic shock

Cited by 17 publications

References 13 publications

Open suprapubic versus retropubic prostatectomy in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia during resident's learning curve: a randomized controlled trial

Open suprapubic versus retropubic prostatectomy in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia during resident's learning curve: a randomized controlled trial

Anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: The next gold standard? No! (or not yet!)

Endoscopic enucleation vs endoscopic vaporization procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia: how should we choose

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About