[Transurethral enucleation and resection versus transurethral resection of the prostate in the treatment of high-risk benign prostatic hyperplasia].

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical effect of transurethral enucleation and resection of the prostate (TUERP) versus that of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the treatment of high-risk BPH.

METHODS

From June 2018 to December 2018, a total of 60 patients with high-risk BPH were randomly assigned to receive TUERP (n = 30) or TURP (n = 30). Comparisons were made between the two groups of patients in the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, volume of the resected prostate, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Compared with the patients treated by TURP, those in the TUERP group showed a significantly shorter operation time(［76.2±15.9］ min vs ［47.5±16.1］ min, P < 0.05), less intraoperative blood loss(［93.7±33.6 vs ［60.5±25.4］ ml］ ml, P < 0.05), but a larger volume of the resected prostate(［30.6±8.5］ g vs ［42.3±12.2］ g, P < 0.05)， and a less incidence of postoperative complications, such as secondary bleeding, uracratia and urethrostenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Both TUERP and TURP are clinically effective for the treatment of high-risk BPH, but TUERP is even better than TURP for its advantages of shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, larger volume of resected prostate, fewer postoperative complications, and less surgical trauma.