Suppr超能文献

激光前列腺剜除术与经尿道前列腺切除术:ACS NSQIP 数据库中的围手术期结果。

Laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate: perioperative outcomes from the ACS NSQIP database.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Riad El-Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon.

Department of Urology, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France.

出版信息

World J Urol. 2020 Nov;38(11):2891-2897. doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03100-7. Epub 2020 Feb 8.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the perioperative outcomes associated with laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) using a national database.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was reviewed for patients who underwent TURP or LEP from 2008 to 2016. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and predisposition to bleeding were compared between TURP and LEP. The 30-day perioperative outcomes including operative time, length of hospital stay (LOS), return to the operating room (OR), bleeding requiring transfusion, and organ system-specific complications were compared between the procedures. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed, adjusting for the type of surgery and other covariates.

RESULTS

The series included 37,577 TURP and 2869 LEP procedures. While TURP was associated with a shorter operative time (55.20 ± 37.80 min) than LEP (102.80 ± 62.30 min), the latter was associated with a shorter hospital stay (1.29 ± 2.73 days) than TURP (2.05 ± 5.20 days). Compared to TURP, LEP had 0.52 (0.47-0.58) times the odds of a LOS > 1 day and 0.67 (0.54-0.83) times the odds of developing urinary tract infections. Nevertheless, no difference was found for other postoperative complications, need for transfusion, and return to OR.

CONCLUSION

Real-life data from a large national database confirmed that LEP is a safe and reproducible procedure to treat benign prostatic obstruction. Compared to TURP, LEP was associated with a lower rate of infectious complications and a shorter LOS at the expense of an increased operative time.

摘要

目的

利用国家数据库比较经尿道前列腺切除术(TURP)和前列腺激光剜除术(LEP)相关的围手术期结果。

方法

回顾 2008 年至 2016 年期间在美国外科医师学院国家外科质量改进计划数据库中接受 TURP 或 LEP 的患者。比较 TURP 和 LEP 之间的基线人口统计学特征、合并症和出血倾向。比较两种手术的 30 天围手术期结果,包括手术时间、住院时间(LOS)、返回手术室(OR)、需要输血的出血以及特定器官系统并发症。进行多变量逻辑回归分析,调整手术类型和其他协变量。

结果

该系列包括 37577 例 TURP 和 2869 例 LEP 手术。虽然 TURP 的手术时间较短(55.20±37.80 分钟),但 LEP 的手术时间较长(102.80±62.30 分钟),而 LEP 的住院时间较短(1.29±2.73 天)比 TURP(2.05±5.20 天)。与 TURP 相比,LEP 的 LOS>1 天的可能性为 0.52(0.47-0.58),尿路感染的可能性为 0.67(0.54-0.83)。然而,在其他术后并发症、输血需求和返回 OR 方面,两者没有差异。

结论

来自大型国家数据库的真实数据证实,LEP 是治疗良性前列腺梗阻的安全且可重复的方法。与 TURP 相比,LEP 与较低的感染并发症发生率和较短的 LOS 相关,但其手术时间较长。

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