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]. 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]. 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] 陈秋月. 萌出前牙冠内病损开窗微创治疗1例伴术后随访4年[J]. 中华口腔医学研究杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 107-110.
[2] 李腾成, 谭益元, 黄群雄, 吴杰英, 肖恒军, 胡成, 李茂胤, 高新, 狄金明. 机器人腹腔镜后入路完全筋膜内根治性前列腺切除术治疗早期前列腺癌[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 452-456.
[3] 韩广玮, 申雪晴, 吴涵潇, 曹炎武, 唐黎明. 前列腺增生并轻度尿道狭窄行去外鞘半导体激光汽化剜除与等离子电切的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 490-494.
[4] 熊风, 林辉煌, 陈晓波. 铥激光在泌尿外科中的临床应用及研究进展[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 533-536.
[5] 李全喜, 唐辉军, 唐友杰, 杨飞. DISCO成像技术在前列腺增生与前列腺癌鉴别诊断中的应用价值[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 332-335.
[6] 方昌华, 杜霖, 陈鑫楠, 王昊, 王文帝, 张成伟, 秦海翔, 邱雪峰, 庄君龙, 徐林峰, 郭宏骞, 张古田. 以累积和分析法研究保留耻骨后间隙机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术的学习曲线[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 319-325.
[7] 谢秋波, 周宇, 宋健, 涂忠, 李想, 汪仁昊, 伍依依, 潘铁军. 全息影像在机器人辅助前列腺癌根治术中保留膀胱颈的应用[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 209-213.
[8] 赖良海, 赵伟, 肖云新, 杨伟明, 陈光耀. 1 470 nm激光"平均三分法"剜除术与等离子剜除术治疗前列腺增生的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 252-256.
[9] 李国峰, 李显文, 周祥福, 何昊麟, 杜红兵, 宾开云. 单极滚珠电极与等离子行经尿道前列腺剜除术的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 247-251.
[10] 单兴利, 王栋, 邢念增, 肖泽均, 李亚健. 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT对前列腺癌盆腔淋巴结转移诊断价值的研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 214-218.
[11] 郑军, 许新, 江爽, 俞继卫. 经腹腹膜前疝修补术治疗前列腺根治性切除术后并发腹股沟疝疗效分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 557-560.
[12] 张宁, 张梦菲, 邱建新, 高闫尧, 陈育, 高靖榆. 腹腔镜下经尿道等离子电切术联合疝环充填式无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟斜疝合并前列腺良性增生[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 441-444.
[13] 李秉林, 吕少诚, 潘飞, 姜涛, 樊华, 寇建涛, 贺强, 郎韧. 供肝灌注液病原菌与肝移植术后早期感染的相关性分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 656-660.
[14] 井鹏, 宋九龙, 高红亮, 王超, 吴珊珊, 俞暖新, 赵添莹. 超声可视化注射对老年偏瘫肩痛炎性吸收的疗效[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(03): 145-151.
[15] 陈笑梅, 陈文辉, 赵宛鄂, 郭婕, 苏超, 付志菊, 杨华, 董志勇, 王存川. 可吞咽自吸收新型胃内球囊治疗轻度肥胖症:一例病例报告[J]. 中华肥胖与代谢病电子杂志, 2023, 09(03): 215-217.
阅读次数
全文


摘要