Enikeev Dmitry, Glybochko Petr, Okhunov Zhamshid, Alyaev Yuriy, Rapoport Leonid, Tsarichenko Dmitry, Enikeev Mikhail, Sorokin Nikolay, Dymov Alim, Taratkin Mark
1 Research Institute for Uronephrology and Reproductive Health, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University) , Moscow, Russia .
2 Department of Urology, University of California, Irvine, California, USA.
J Endourol. 2018 May;32(5):417-423. doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0898. Epub 2018 Mar 13.
Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) has been recognized as a viable treatment modality for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and functional outcomes of three different techniques of EEP, including monopolar enucleation (MEP), holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), and thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP).
The study consisted of a retrospective comparison of pre- and postoperative parameters in men undergoing three types of EEP: MEP, HoLEP, and ThuLEP. Functional parameters were evaluated before and 6 months after surgery, which included the International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum flow rate, postvoid residual volume, prostate volume, and sodium levels of all patients.
A total of 551 men with the mean age of 67.1 years were included in the study. Of these, MEP was performed on 95 patients, HoLEP was performed on 254 patients, and ThuLEP on 202 patients. The mean mass of morcellated tissue obtained during the three techniques did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). Mean procedure times of ThuLEP and HoLEP were shorter than MEP demonstrating 72, 76, and 86 minutes, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean catheterization time following laser EEPs was shorter than MEP as shown by 1.3, 1.3, and 3.8 days, respectively (p < 0.01). Hospital stay times of HoLEP and ThuLEP were shorter than MEP demonstrated by 3.3, 3.4, and 6.9 days, respectively (p < 0.01). Patients after MEP had significant decrease in postoperative hemoglobin and sodium levels. All the groups showed statistically significant improvement in the aforementioned parameters following treatment.
Both techniques of laser enucleation proved to be efficacious in the management of BPH. MEP of the prostate seems to be a highly promising addition to the list of enucleation techniques and was determined to be an effective and acceptable procedure, despite a higher complication rate.
前列腺内镜剜除术(EEP)已被公认为是治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)男性患者的一种可行治疗方式。我们研究的目的是比较三种不同EEP技术的疗效和功能结果,包括单极剜除术(MEP)、钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)和铥激光前列腺剜除术(ThuLEP)。
本研究包括对接受三种EEP(MEP、HoLEP和ThuLEP)的男性患者术前和术后参数的回顾性比较。在手术前和术后6个月评估功能参数,包括国际前列腺症状评分、最大尿流率、残余尿量、前列腺体积以及所有患者的血钠水平。
共有551名平均年龄为67.1岁的男性纳入研究。其中,95例患者接受了MEP,254例患者接受了HoLEP,202例患者接受了ThuLEP。三种技术过程中粉碎组织的平均质量无显著差异(p>0.05)。ThuLEP和HoLEP的平均手术时间短于MEP,分别为72分钟、76分钟和86分钟(p<0.01)。激光EEP术后的平均导尿时间短于MEP,分别为1.3天、1.3天和3.8天(p<0.01)。HoLEP和ThuLEP的住院时间短于MEP,分别为3.3天、3.4天和6.9天(p<0.01)。接受MEP的患者术后血红蛋白和血钠水平显著降低。所有组在治疗后上述参数均有统计学意义的改善。
两种激光剜除技术在BPH的治疗中均被证明是有效的。前列腺MEP似乎是剜除技术中的一个非常有前景的补充,尽管并发症发生率较高,但被确定为一种有效且可接受的手术。