Suppr超能文献

经尿道前列腺电切术联合二极管激光与双极等离子电切术治疗良性前列腺梗阻的荟萃分析。

Transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using a diode laser versus bipolar plasmakinetic for benign prostatic obstruction: a meta-analysis.

机构信息

Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), Department of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

Lasers Med Sci. 2020 Jul;35(5):1159-1169. doi: 10.1007/s10103-020-02949-9. Epub 2020 Jan 9.

Abstract

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) versus bipolar plasma kinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A systematic literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CKNI databases to identify eligible studies published before April 2019. The quality of evidence and methodology was assessed. Primary outcomes were clinical and demographic characteristics and postoperative efficacy including maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR), quality of life (QoL), and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS); secondary outcomes were intraoperative variables and major complications. Meta-analyses of extracted data were performed with the RevMan version 5.2. The overall effects were determined by the Z-test, and a p value less than 0.05 was considered with significant difference. A fixed- or random-effect model was chosen to fit the pooled heterogeneity (determined by Chi-squared test and I). As qualified trials were few, subgroup analyses were not performed. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 451 patients were enrolled in our meta-analysis. In the included trials, all the diode (wavelength at 980 nm and 1470 nm) lasers applied output at continuous wave mode; the energy settings ranged from 120 to 160 W for enucleation and 30 to 60 W for coagulation. DiLEP provided less perioperative hemoglobin decrease (MD = - 3.22; 95% CI (- 5.15, - 1.29); p = 0.001; I = 65%), less postoperative catheterization time (MD = - 17.82; 95% CI (- 32.74, - 2.90); p = 0.02; I = 96%), less postoperative irrigation time (MD = - 7.15; 95% CI (- 13.67, - 0.62); p = 0.03; I = 98%), and lower incidence of urinary irritative symptoms (OR = 0.31; 95% CI (0.14, 0.67); p = 0.003; I = 0%) compared with PKEP. During the 1, 3, 6, and 12-month postoperative follow-up, no statistically significant difference was found in Qmax, IPSS, QoL, and PVR between the procedures. As regards other perioperative and postoperative parameters and major complications, we found no significant difference. Both DiLEP and PKEP are safe and efficient methods for the treatment of BPH. However, DiLEP showed less perioperative hemoglobin decrease, less postoperative catheterization time, less postoperative irrigation time, and lower rates of postoperative irritative symptoms compared with the PKEP group.

摘要

评估二极管激光前列腺切除术(DiLEP)与双极等离子前列腺剜除术(PKEP)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)的临床疗效和安全性。使用 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane 图书馆和中国知网(CNKI)数据库系统地检索了截至 2019 年 4 月发表的合格研究。评估了证据和方法的质量。主要结局为临床和人口统计学特征以及术后疗效,包括最大尿流率(Qmax)、剩余尿量(PVR)、生活质量(QoL)和国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS);次要结局为术中变量和主要并发症。使用 RevMan 版本 5.2 对提取的数据进行荟萃分析。总体效应由 Z 检验确定,p 值小于 0.05 为有统计学意义。选择固定或随机效应模型来拟合合并的异质性(由 Chi-squared 检验和 I 确定)。由于合格的试验很少,因此未进行亚组分析。我们的荟萃分析纳入了 4 项随机对照试验(RCT),共 451 例患者。在纳入的试验中,所有二极管(波长 980nm 和 1470nm)激光均采用连续波模式输出;剜除的能量设置范围为 120-160W,凝固的能量设置范围为 30-60W。与 PKEP 相比,DiLEP 术中血红蛋白下降更少(MD=-3.22;95%CI(-5.15,-1.29);p=0.001;I=65%),术后导尿管留置时间更短(MD=-17.82;95%CI(-32.74,-2.90);p=0.02;I=96%),术后冲洗时间更短(MD=-7.15;95%CI(-13.67,-0.62);p=0.03;I=98%),术后尿刺激性症状发生率更低(OR=0.31;95%CI(0.14,0.67);p=0.003;I=0%)。在术后 1、3、6 和 12 个月的随访中,两种手术方法在 Qmax、IPSS、QoL 和 PVR 方面均无统计学差异。至于其他围手术期和术后参数以及主要并发症,我们没有发现显著差异。DiLEP 和 PKEP 都是治疗 BPH 的安全有效的方法。然而,与 PKEP 组相比,DiLEP 术中血红蛋白下降更少,术后导尿管留置时间更短,术后冲洗时间更短,术后刺激性症状发生率更低。

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