Hong Kai, Liu Yu-qing, Lu Jian, Xiao Chun-lei, Huang Yi, Ma Lu-lin
Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2015 Mar;21(3):245-50.
To compare the effect and impact of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and 120-W thulium: YAG vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) on erectile function in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
We retrospectively analyzed 93 cases of symptomatic BPH treated by HoLEP or 120 W ThuVEP. We made comparisons between the two groups of patients in the baseline and postoperative clinical and surgical indexes as well as their IPSS, quality of life (QOL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), and IIEF-EF scores before surgery and during the 12-month follow-up.
ThuVEP, in comparison with HoLEP, achieved a significantly shorter operation time ([57.6 +/- 12. 8] vs. [70.4 +/- 21.8] min, P = 0.001) and a higher laser efficiency ([0.71 +/- 0.18] vs. [0.62 +/- 0.19] g/min, P = 0. 021). At 1, 6, or 12 months of follow-up, no significant differences were observed in IPSS, OOL, Omax, and PVR between the two groups (P > 0.05). Both the HoLEP and ThuVEP groups showed low incidences of complications and remarkably improved IIEF-EF scores at 12 months postoperatively, but with no significant differences (both P > 0.05). However, in those with relatively normal erectile functions before operation, the mean IIEF-EF score was reduced from 22.8 +/- 2.2 preoperatively to 21.0 +/- 2.7 after HoLEP, (P = 0.036).
Both HoLEP and 120W ThuVEP are effective and safe in the treatment of BPH. Compared with HoLEP, 120 W ThuVEP has even a higher laser efficiency. However, neither can significantly improve erectile function, and HoLEP may have a short-term negative impact on the relatively normal erectile function of the patient.
比较钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)和120W 铥激光:钇铝石榴石激光前列腺汽化剜除术(ThuVEP)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)对勃起功能的影响。
我们回顾性分析了93例接受HoLEP或120W ThuVEP治疗的有症状BPH患者。我们比较了两组患者的基线、术后临床和手术指标,以及他们术前和12个月随访期间的国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量(QOL)、最大尿流率(Qmax)、残余尿量(PVR)和国际勃起功能指数-勃起功能(IIEF-EF)评分。
与HoLEP相比,ThuVEP的手术时间显著缩短([57.6±12.8] vs. [70.4±21.8]分钟,P = 0.001),激光效率更高([0.71±0.18] vs. [0.62±0.19]克/分钟,P = 0.021)。在随访1、6或12个月时,两组之间的IPSS、QOL、Qmax和PVR没有显著差异(P>0.05)。HoLEP组和ThuVEP组术后并发症发生率均较低,术后12个月时IIEF-EF评分均显著改善,但无显著差异(P均>0.05)。然而,在术前勃起功能相对正常的患者中,HoLEP术后平均IIEF-EF评分从术前的22.8±2.2降至21.0±2.7,(P = 0.036)。
HoLEP和120W ThuVEP治疗BPH均有效且安全。与HoLEP相比,120W ThuVEP的激光效率更高。然而,两者均不能显著改善勃起功能,且HoLEP可能对患者相对正常的勃起功能有短期负面影响。