Efficacy and safety of bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of bladder tumors: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

CONTEXT

In the management of bladder tumors bipolarenergy has been used as a common alternative to the conventional monopolar transurethral resection of the bladder (M-TURB).

AIM

This study aims to examine the clinical efficacy and safety of bipolar versus monopolar TURB tumors (TURBTs).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for the identification of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the outcomes between the two procedures.

THE STATISTICAL TOOL

Meta-analysis was performed using the software Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

We identified nine RCTs involving 1193 patients. In terms of the surgical outcomes, there was no significant difference between the bipolar and monopolar TURBT. However, there was significantly reduced bladder perforation (risk ratio [RR] = 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.30-0.77; P = 0.002) and shorter hospital stay (mean difference = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.83-0.03, P = 0.01) in the bipolar TURBT group. There was also a lower incidence of thermal damage, which causes histopathological artifacts for patients treated via bipolar TURBT relative to those treated via monopolar TURBT (RR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.55-0.78; P < 0.00001). P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. However, after bipolar and monopolar TURBT, we had no sufficient evidence regarding the recurrence rate.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that the use of bipolar technology, which is associated with less bladder perforation and lower thermal artifacts in TURBT is safer and more effective.