Cargando…

A prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of bipolar transurethral plasma vaporisation (B-TUVP) as an alternative to the ‘gold standard’ monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in a prospective randomised controlled stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Elsakka, Ahmed M., Eltatawy, Hssan H., Almekaty, Khaled H., Ramadan, Ahmed R., Gameel, Tarik A., Farahat, Yasser
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5122807/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27900218
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.09.005
_version_ 1782469644869697536
author Elsakka, Ahmed M.
Eltatawy, Hssan H.
Almekaty, Khaled H.
Ramadan, Ahmed R.
Gameel, Tarik A.
Farahat, Yasser
author_facet Elsakka, Ahmed M.
Eltatawy, Hssan H.
Almekaty, Khaled H.
Ramadan, Ahmed R.
Gameel, Tarik A.
Farahat, Yasser
author_sort Elsakka, Ahmed M.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of bipolar transurethral plasma vaporisation (B-TUVP) as an alternative to the ‘gold standard’ monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in a prospective randomised controlled study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 82 patients indicated for prostatectomy were assigned to two groups, group I (40 patients) underwent B-TUVP and group II (42 patients) underwent M-TURP. The safety of both techniques was evaluated by reporting perioperative changes in serum Na(+), serum K(+), haematocrit (packed cell volume), and any perioperative complications. For the efficacy assessment, patients were evaluated subjectively by comparing the improvement in International Prostate Symptom Score and objectively by measuring the maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR) before and after the procedures. RESULTS: In group II, there was a significant perioperative drop in serum Na(+) (from 137.5 to 129.4 mmol/L) and haematocrit (from 42.9% to 38.2%) (both P < 0.001). Moreover, one patient in group II had TUR syndrome. The remote postoperative complication rate was (15%) in group I and comprised of stress urinary incontinence (5%), bladder outlet obstruction (5%), and residual adenoma (5%). In group II, the remote postoperative complication rate was (4.8%), as two patients developed urethral stricture. There were statistically significant improvements in micturition variables postoperatively in both arms, but the magnitude of improvement was statistically more significant in group II. CONCLUSION: B-TUPV seems to be safer than M-TURP; however, the lack of a tissue specimen and the relatively high retreatment rate are major disadvantages of the B-TUVP technique. Moreover, M-TURP appears to be more effective than B-TUPV and its safety can be improved by careful case selection and adequate haemostasis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5122807
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51228072016-11-29 A prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate Elsakka, Ahmed M. Eltatawy, Hssan H. Almekaty, Khaled H. Ramadan, Ahmed R. Gameel, Tarik A. Farahat, Yasser Arab J Urol Original Article OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of bipolar transurethral plasma vaporisation (B-TUVP) as an alternative to the ‘gold standard’ monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in a prospective randomised controlled study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 82 patients indicated for prostatectomy were assigned to two groups, group I (40 patients) underwent B-TUVP and group II (42 patients) underwent M-TURP. The safety of both techniques was evaluated by reporting perioperative changes in serum Na(+), serum K(+), haematocrit (packed cell volume), and any perioperative complications. For the efficacy assessment, patients were evaluated subjectively by comparing the improvement in International Prostate Symptom Score and objectively by measuring the maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR) before and after the procedures. RESULTS: In group II, there was a significant perioperative drop in serum Na(+) (from 137.5 to 129.4 mmol/L) and haematocrit (from 42.9% to 38.2%) (both P < 0.001). Moreover, one patient in group II had TUR syndrome. The remote postoperative complication rate was (15%) in group I and comprised of stress urinary incontinence (5%), bladder outlet obstruction (5%), and residual adenoma (5%). In group II, the remote postoperative complication rate was (4.8%), as two patients developed urethral stricture. There were statistically significant improvements in micturition variables postoperatively in both arms, but the magnitude of improvement was statistically more significant in group II. CONCLUSION: B-TUPV seems to be safer than M-TURP; however, the lack of a tissue specimen and the relatively high retreatment rate are major disadvantages of the B-TUVP technique. Moreover, M-TURP appears to be more effective than B-TUPV and its safety can be improved by careful case selection and adequate haemostasis. Elsevier 2016-11-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5122807/ /pubmed/27900218 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.09.005 Text en © 2016 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Arab Association of Urology. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Elsakka, Ahmed M.
Eltatawy, Hssan H.
Almekaty, Khaled H.
Ramadan, Ahmed R.
Gameel, Tarik A.
Farahat, Yasser
A prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate
title A prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate
title_full A prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate
title_fullStr A prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate
title_full_unstemmed A prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate
title_short A prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate
title_sort prospective randomised controlled study comparing bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate to monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5122807/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27900218
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2016.09.005
work_keys_str_mv AT elsakkaahmedm aprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT eltatawyhssanh aprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT almekatykhaledh aprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT ramadanahmedr aprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT gameeltarika aprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT farahatyasser aprospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT elsakkaahmedm prospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT eltatawyhssanh prospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT almekatykhaledh prospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT ramadanahmedr prospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT gameeltarika prospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate
AT farahatyasser prospectiverandomisedcontrolledstudycomparingbipolarplasmavaporisationoftheprostatetomonopolartransurethralresectionoftheprostate