切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2018, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (04) : 274 -277. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2018.04.015

所属专题: 文献

临床研究

1 470 nm激光前列腺汽化与剜除术中灌注液吸收对内环境的影响
周发友1, 张书贤1,(), 沈亚军1, 郑久德1   
  1. 1. 241000 芜湖,皖南医学院第二附属医院泌尿外科
  • 收稿日期:2017-12-21 出版日期:2018-08-01
  • 通信作者: 张书贤
  • 基金资助:
    皖南医学院重点科研项目培育基金(WK2016ZF10)

Effects of irrigation fluid's absorption on 1 470nm diode laser enucleation versus vaporization for benign prostate hyperplasia

Fayou Zhou1, Shuxian Zhang1,(), Yajun Shen1, Jiude Zheng1   

  1. 1. Department of Urology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Wannan Medical College, Wuhu 241000, China
  • Received:2017-12-21 Published:2018-08-01
  • Corresponding author: Shuxian Zhang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Zhang Shuxian, Email:
引用本文:

周发友, 张书贤, 沈亚军, 郑久德. 1 470 nm激光前列腺汽化与剜除术中灌注液吸收对内环境的影响[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2018, 12(04): 274-277.

Fayou Zhou, Shuxian Zhang, Yajun Shen, Jiude Zheng. Effects of irrigation fluid's absorption on 1 470nm diode laser enucleation versus vaporization for benign prostate hyperplasia[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition), 2018, 12(04): 274-277.

目的

探讨经尿道1 470 nm半导体激光前列腺汽化术(Di VAP)与剜除术(Di VEP)术中灌注液吸收对机体安全性的影响。

方法

2016年7月至2017年2月,我院40例前列腺增生(BPH)患者被随机分成两组,分别进行Di VAP及Di VEP治疗。比较两组患者手术时间、灌注液使用量、灌注液吸收量、术后膀胱持续冲洗时间、术后尿管保留时间、术后住院时间、血红蛋白、电解质、国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量评分(QOL)、最大尿流率(Qmax)、残余尿(PVR)、并发症等。

结果

两组患者年龄、前列腺体积、术前IPSS评分、PVR、Qmax及平均手术时间、灌注液使用量、术后膀胱持续冲洗时间、术后尿管保留时间、术后住院时间差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。Di VAP组与Di VEP组术后血红蛋白下降值分别为(1.9±1.0)g/L vs(12.3±11.3)g/L(P=0.001),Di VAP组监测到灌注液吸收3例,平均吸收量675(356~1 078)ml,Di VEP组监测到灌注液吸收10例,平均吸收量2 089(187~7 240)ml,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者手术前后血清K+、Na+变化差异无统计学意义,血红蛋白下降有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组患者术后IPSS、QOL、Qmax及PVR比较差异无统计学意义,两组术后并发症发生率差异无统计学意义。

结论

经尿道1 470 nm半导体激光前列腺汽化与剜除术均是治疗(BPH)的有效术式,但汽化术中灌注液吸收与失血量更少。

Objective

To investigate the effect of intraoperative absorption of irrigation fluid on the safety of transurethral vaporization of prostate (Di VAP) and enucleation of prostate (Di VEP) with 1470 nm semiconductor laser.

Methods

From July 2016 to February 2017, 40 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) admitted to our hospital were randomly divided into the Di VAP and Di VEP groups. The operation time, irrigation fluid volume, irrigation fluid absorption volume, postoperative persistent irrigation time of bladder, postoperative retention time of urinary catheter, postoperative length of hospital stay, hemoglobin, electrolyte, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QOL) score, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine volume (PVR) and postoperative complications were statistically compared between two groups.

Results

No statistical significance was noted in age, prostate volume, preoperative IPSS score, PVR, Qmax, mean operation time, irrigation fluid volume, postoperative persistent irrigation time of bladder, postoperative retention time of urinary catheter and postoperative length of hospital stay between two groups (all P>0.05). After corresponding surgery, the hemoglobin level in the Di VAP group was (1.9±1.0) g/L, significantly lower than (12.3±11.3) g/L in the Di VEP group (P=0.001). In the Di VAP group, irrigation fluid absorption was monitored in 3 cases with an average absorption volume of 675 (356-1 078) ml. In the Di VEP group, irrigation fluid absorption was observed in 10 cases with a mean absorption volume of 2 089 (187-7 240) ml with statistical significance between two groups (P<0.05). In both groups, the serum levels of K+ and Na+ did not significantly differ before and after surgery, whereas the hemoglobin level was significantly decreased (P<0.05). The IPSS, QOL, Qmax, PVR and the incidence of postoperative complications did not significantly differ between two groups.

Conclusion

Both Di VAP and Di VEP with 1 470 nm semiconductor laser are efficacious methods for the treatment of BPH, whereas Di VAP yields less irrigation fluid absorption and blood loss intraoperatively.

表1 1 470 nm半导体激光前列腺汽化组与剜除组术前指标比较(±s
表2 1 470 nm半导体激光前列腺汽化组与剜除组围手术期各指标比较(±s
表3 1 470 nm半导体激光前列腺汽化组与剜除组手术前、后下尿路症状指标比较(±s
[1]
周焱,孙晓飞,代光成, 等. 国产160 W绿激光经尿道汽化术治疗大体积前列腺增生[J/CD]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(2): 92-95.
[2]
赵力,沈文浩,印苏培, 等. 经尿道前列腺电切术治疗大体积良性前列腺增生安全性及有效性的回顾性对照研究[J]. 中华泌尿外科杂志, 2015, 36(4): 299-303.
[3]
杨国胜,刘刚. 绿激光治疗前列腺增生的优势及进展[J/CD]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2016, 10(1): 1-4.
[4]
Hermanns T,Grossmann NC,Wettstein MS, et al. Absorption of irrigation fluid occurs frequently during high power 532 nm laser vaporization of the prostate[J]. J Urol, 2015, 193 (1): 211-216.
[5]
Müllhaupt G,Abt D,Mordasini L, et al. Absorption of irrigation fluid during thulium laser vaporization of the prostate[J]. J Endourol, 2017, 31(4): 380-383.
[6]
江东根,肖楚天,庞俊, 等. 1 470 nm激光顺行法前列腺剜除术治疗前列腺增生[J/CD]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(1): 4-8.
[7]
Hahn RG. Fluid absorption and the ethanol monitoring method[J]. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2015, 59(9): 1081-1093.
[8]
李军,蒋婧妍. 内窥镜手术的灌注液吸收与麻醉管理[J]. 现代实用医学, 2014, 26(2): 123-134.
[9]
Pasha MT,Khan MA,Jamal Y, et al. postoperative complications with glycine and sterile distilled water after transurethral resection of prostate[J]. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad, 2015, 27(1): 135-139.
[10]
Porsch M,Mittelstädt P,Wendler JJ, et al. Measurement of procedure-specific irrigation fluid absorption in transurethral therapy of lower urinary tract syndrome, using ethanolic saline and breath alcometry[J]. Urol Int, 2016, 97(3): 299-309.
[11]
Norlén H. Isotonic solutions of mannitol, sorbitol and glycine and distilled water as irrigating fluids during transurethral resection of the prostate and calculation of irrigating fluid influx[J]. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl,1985, 96: 1-50, 81p.
[12]
Zhao Y,Liu C,Zhou G, et al. A retrospective evaluation of benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment by transurethral vaporization using a 1 470 nm laser[J]. Photomed Laser Surg, 2013, 31(12): 626-629.
[13]
章俊,王曦龙,史朝亮, 等. 1 470 nm半导体激光前列腺汽化剜除术治疗复杂性良性前列腺增生(附80例报告)[J]. 现代泌尿外科杂志. 2017, 22(3): 173-175.
[14]
刘多,范利,刘成, 等. 经尿道半导体激光前列腺剜除术与前列腺电切术治疗不同体积良性前列腺增生的临床对比分析[J]. 中华男科学杂志. 2017, 23(3): 217-222.
[15]
Huang SR,Ma AY,Liu Y, et al. Effects of inflammatory factors including plasma tumor necrosis factor-α in the clinical treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome[J]. Oncol Lett, 2017, 13(6): 5016-5020.
[16]
程伟,万恒麟,赵嘉禾, 等. 大量冲洗液吸收对肾脏损害的实验研究[J]. 临床泌尿外科杂志,1993, 8(3): 171-174.
[17]
王永忠,郭文彬,刘建平, 等. 经尿道单极前列腺剜除术术中内环境变化的探讨[J/CD]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(3): 203-206.
[1] 陈穹, 潘鑫, 应伟峰, 侯羽宇, 路明, 安冬清, 顾佳瑶, 彭卫军. 数字乳腺体层合成和全视野数字乳腺X线摄影技术在不同体位组合下的诊断效能[J/OL]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-30.
[2] 罗士维, 李卫国, 代国荣. 碘仿碘甘油明胶海绵治疗干槽症的临床效果回顾分析[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 380-384.
[3] 王刘欣, 郭艳霞, 陈永进, 张旻, 李强. 激光治疗应用于撕脱性损伤牙再植根面处理的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 345-350.
[4] 沈皓, 张驰, 韩旻轩, 陆晓庆, 周愉, 周莉丽. 骨皮质切开术对正畸治疗牙根吸收影响的Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 175-184.
[5] 李想, 郭征, 田洪哲, 李杜, 熊梦瑶, 潘铁军. 1 470 nm半导体激光减容性切除治疗高危前列腺增生的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 448-452.
[6] 程志刚, 魏辉, 李一波, 韩健, 钟永豪, 王铭, 张文辉, 周传东. 经尿道前列腺剜除术中保留前列腺分叶沟间组织对术后顺行射精功能的保护[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 453-458.
[7] 杨登科, 蔡明志, 张星星, 胡青, 郭大勇, 高喆, 毕永启, 胡伟. 腹腔镜膀胱颈Y-V成形术与经尿道膀胱颈电切治疗膀胱颈挛缩的比较[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 392-396.
[8] 莫林键, 杨舒博, 农卫赟, 程继文. 人工智能虚拟数字医师在钬激光前列腺剜除日间手术患教管理中的应用[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 318-322.
[9] 潘兴赫, 董翔, 杨海洋, 张雪斌, 甘卫东. 超选择性前列腺动脉栓塞治疗伴急性尿潴留的高危高龄前列腺增生[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 237-242.
[10] 张铭星, 刘文倩, 王以然, 赵泽恬, 袁欣怡, 丁留成. 江苏地区腹腔镜下前列腺癌根治术后一年夜尿症发生率及相关危险因素多中心回顾性研究[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 141-145.
[11] 汪洋, 李志鹏, 张楠, 何海填, 杨伟锋, 张焕灵, 王可兵. 保护射精技术在前列腺等离子剜除术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 152-156.
[12] 曾明辉, 蒋东方, 秦锁炳. 钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗前列腺增生疗效的影响因素[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 157-161.
[13] 梅鑫, 张世科, 张巧珍, 吴文起. 前列腺增生导致下尿路症状手术时机的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 96-99.
[14] 李腾成, 黄群雄, 胡成, 肖恒军, 徐锦斌, 高舜天, 黄展森, 高新, 狄金明. 机器人腹腔镜后入路筋膜内和筋膜外根治性前列腺切除术技术分析[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 12-18.
[15] 李俊涛, 张天佑, 叶雷, 郭强, 吴坚坚, 尧冰, 王德娟, 邱剑光. 保留"尿道系膜"的腹腔镜下前列腺根治性切除术后尿控情况的研究[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 19-24.
阅读次数
全文


摘要