Suppr超能文献

两种不同整块前列腺铥激光剜除术的比较:技术是否会影响并发症和手术效果?

Comparison Between Two Different En Bloc Thulium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: Does Technique Influence Complications and Outcomes?

作者信息

Castellani Daniele, Saredi Giovanni, Pirola Giacomo Maria, Gasparri Luca, Pavia Maria Pia, Ambrosini Francesca, Berti Lorenzo, Sembenini Federico, Dellabella Marco

机构信息

Department of Urology, IRCCS INRCA, Ancona, Italy.

Department of Urology, Ospedale di Circolo e Fondazione Macchi, Varese, Italy.

出版信息

Urology. 2018 Sep;119:121-126. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.05.024. Epub 2018 Jun 10.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether 2 similar en bloc thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) techniques can influence surgical complications and outcomes.

MATERIAL

Within 2 institutional databases 164 men who underwent 2 different en bloc ThuLEP techniques were compared using propensity scores. With the first technique prostatic lobes were all enucleated en bloc, whereas, with the second the median lobe was enucleated first and the lateral lobes were enucleated en bloc thereafter. All patients were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after surgery with PSA, Qmax, and self-administrated IPSS. Operative data and 30-day postoperative complications were gathered.

RESULTS

Surgical time and 24-hour blood loss were similar between 2 groups (55 vs 55 minutes, P .97288; -0.9 vs -1.3 g/dL, P .112 respectively). Median hospital stay after surgery was 3 days in both groups (P .3251). IPSS and Qmax improved equally in both groups (median 3 vs 3, P .941; 19.17 vs 20.63 mL/s, P .8232 respectively). Early complications were mild to moderate (Clavien I 12.2% vs 12.2%; Clavien II 3.6% vs 4.84%; Clavien IIIb 1.2% vs 2.4%).

CONCLUSION

Our results show that en bloc ThuLEP approaches appear feasible, have similar complications and outcomes and can be considered surgeon-independent techniques. En bloc ThuLEP may be proposed even for laser-naïve urologists as an alternative to the original 3-lobe technique.

摘要

目的

评估两种相似的整块式铥激光前列腺剜除术(ThuLEP)技术是否会影响手术并发症及手术效果。

材料

在两个机构数据库中,对164例行两种不同整块式ThuLEP技术的男性患者进行倾向评分比较。第一种技术是将前列腺各叶整块剜除,而第二种技术是先将中叶整块剜除,然后再将两侧叶整块剜除。所有患者在基线期及术后6个月均接受前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)、最大尿流率(Qmax)及患者自行填写的国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)评估。收集手术数据及术后30天内的并发症情况。

结果

两组患者的手术时间及24小时失血量相似(分别为55分钟对55分钟,P = 0.97288;-0.9克/分升对-1.3克/分升,P = 0.112)。两组患者术后中位住院时间均为3天(P = 0.3251)。两组患者的IPSS及Qmax改善程度相同(中位数分别为3对3,P = 0.941;19.17毫升/秒对20.63毫升/秒,P = 0.8232)。早期并发症均为轻至中度(Clavien I级:12.2%对12.2%;Clavien II级:3.6%对4.84%;Clavien IIIb级:1.2%对2.4%)。

结论

我们的结果表明,整块式ThuLEP方法似乎可行,并发症及手术效果相似,可被视为与术者无关的技术。即使对于初次使用激光的泌尿外科医生,整块式ThuLEP也可作为原始三叶技术的替代方法。

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