Suppr超能文献

钬激光前列腺切除术与经尿道前列腺切除术:一项至少4年长期随访的随机试验结果

Holmium laser resection of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate: results of a randomized trial with 4-year minimum long-term followup.

作者信息

Westenberg Andre, Gilling Peter, Kennett Katie, Frampton Chris, Fraundorfer Mark

机构信息

Department of Urology, Tauranga Hospital, Tauranga, New Zealand.

出版信息

J Urol. 2004 Aug;172(2):616-9. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000132739.57555.d8.

Abstract

PURPOSE

It has previously been shown that holmium laser resection of the prostate (HoLRP) is superior to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) with regard to perioperative morbidity and is equivalent to TURP in the short term. We present the long-term results of a randomized, prospective trial comparing HoLRP to TURP since information regarding the durability of holmium prostatectomy is lacking in the literature to date.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 120 patients with urodynamic obstruction were randomized (April 1996 to August 1997) into 2 comparable groups and assigned to HoLRP or TURP. All patients were assessed preoperatively and followed prospectively at 3 weeks, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 48 months postoperatively with an American Urological Association symptom score, quality of life score, peak urinary flow rate, and questionnaires concerning sexual function and continence. Preoperative pressure flow studies, ultrasound prostatic volume assessment and post-void residual volume measurement were repeated at the 6-month visit. All adverse events were noted.

RESULTS

Of 120 patients 73 completed the 48-month assessment. HoLRP and TURP resulted in significant improvements in all parameters. There was no difference between the 2 techniques in terms of urodynamic parameters, potency, continence and symptom scores at the 48-month assessment. HoLRP took significantly longer to perform but perioperative morbidity, catheter time, nursing contact time and hospital stay were significantly less for HoLRP compared to TURP.

CONCLUSIONS

HoLRP and TURP give equivalent and satisfactory long-term results, with no differences noted in major morbidity. This confirms the durability of these 2 treatments. Peri-operative morbidity is less with HoLRP.

摘要

目的

先前的研究表明,在围手术期发病率方面,钬激光前列腺切除术(HoLRP)优于经尿道前列腺切除术(TURP),且在短期内与TURP相当。由于目前文献中缺乏关于钬激光前列腺切除术耐久性的信息,我们展示了一项将HoLRP与TURP进行比较的随机前瞻性试验的长期结果。

材料与方法

共有120例存在尿动力学梗阻的患者(1996年4月至1997年8月)被随机分为2个可比组,分别接受HoLRP或TURP治疗。所有患者在术前进行评估,并在术后3周、3个月、6个月、12个月、24个月和48个月进行前瞻性随访,采用美国泌尿外科学会症状评分、生活质量评分、最大尿流率,以及关于性功能和控尿的问卷。在术后6个月的随访中重复进行术前压力流研究、超声前列腺体积评估和排尿后残余尿量测量。记录所有不良事件。

结果

120例患者中有73例完成了48个月的评估。HoLRP和TURP在所有参数上均有显著改善。在48个月的评估中,两种技术在尿动力学参数、性功能、控尿和症状评分方面没有差异。HoLRP的手术时间明显更长,但与TURP相比,HoLRP的围手术期发病率、导尿管留置时间、护理接触时间和住院时间明显更少。

结论

HoLRP和TURP产生了等效且令人满意的长期结果,在主要发病率方面没有差异。这证实了这两种治疗方法的耐久性。HoLRP的围手术期发病率更低。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验