Home    中文  
 
  • Search
  • lucene Search
  • Citation
  • Fig/Tab
  • Adv Search
Just Accepted  |  Current Issue  |  Archive  |  Featured Articles  |  Most Read  |  Most Download  |  Most Cited

Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition) ›› 2017, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (05): 322-325. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2017.05.008

Special Issue:

• Clinical Researches • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparison of efficacy and safety of transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate and transurethral resection of prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia

Zetao Liu1,(), Li Yu2, Qibo Zhang1, Fengyao Wang1, Jianbo Sun1   

  1. 1. Department of Urology, the Third People's Hospital of Qingdao, Shandong 266041, China
    2. Department of Hospital Infection-Control, the Third People's Hospital of Qingdao, Shandong 266041, China
  • Received:2016-08-10 Online:2017-10-01 Published:2017-10-01
  • Contact: Zetao Liu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Liu Zetao, Email:

Abstract:

Objective

To compare efficacy and safety of transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate (PKRP) and transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia(BPH), to provide the basis for the clinical treatment of BPH.

Methods

Eighty four patients with BPH were enrolled in PKRP group (n=42) and TURP group (n=42). The differences of operation index and quality of life score (QOL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), residual urine volume (RUV) and the international prostate symptom score (IPSS) between the two group were compared.

Results

Average operation time, average bleeding volume and indwelling catheter time were shorter and lower in PKRP group, the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in the washing time and postoperative hospitalization time between the two groups (P>0.05). Compared with preoperative, QOL, Qmax, RUV, IPSS and other indicators were improved postoperatively (P<0.01), but there was no significant difference between the two group (P>0.05). The incidence of complications in PKRP group was lower than TURP group (χ2=4.46, P<0.05).

Conclusion

The clinical efficacy and safety of PKRP was better than TURP, and the incidence of complications was lower, it was an ideal operation for BPH which was worthy of clinical application and promotion.

Key words: Benign prostate hyperplasia, Resection of prostate, Plasmakinetic, Efficacy

京ICP 备07035254号-20
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition), All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 020-85252990 E-mail: chinendourology@126.com
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd