Endoscopic Enucleation versus Open Prostatectomy for Treating Large Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the overall efficacy and safety of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EP) vs open prostatectomy (OP) for large benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: We conducted an electronic search of PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to detect all...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Maoyin, Qiu, Jianguang, Hou, Qi, Wang, Dejuan, Huang, Wentao, Hu, Cheng, Li, Ke, Gao, Xin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Research Article
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4380430/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25826453
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121265
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the overall efficacy and safety of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EP) vs open prostatectomy (OP) for large benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: We conducted an electronic search of PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to detect all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EP with OP. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. RESULTS: Seven RCTs (735 patients) were included. At the 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up, there were no significant differences in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), quality of life (QoL) score and post-void residual urine volume (PVR) between EP and OP. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) was higher with EP (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21 to 1.78, p=0.01) at the 12-month follow-up. The catheterization time (WMD: 3.80 d, 95%CI: -5.11 to -2.48, P<0.00001) and hospital stay (WMD: 4.93 d, 95%CI: -5.96 to -3.89, P<0.00001) were shorter with EP. The duration of operation was longer for EP compared with OP (WMD: 16.21 min, 95%CI: 3.72 to 28.70, P=0.01). The resected tissue weight (WMD: -9.63 g, 95%CI: -14.46 to -4.81, P<0.0001) and decrease in hemoglobin (WMD: -1.14 g/dL, 95%CI: -1.81 to -0.47, P=0.0008) were less with EP. EP was associated with fewer blood transfusions (risk ratio: 0.22, 95%CI: 0.10 to 0.47, P=0.0001). There were no significant differences between EP and OP when comparing other complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although only a limited number of RCTs with relatively limited follow-up are available, EP is shown to have a similar postoperative profile and comparable safety to OP. By contrast, EP may have a more desirable perioperative profile. EP appears to be an effective and safe minimally invasive option for treating large prostates that requires only brief convalescence.

Ejemplares similares