摘要
目的:比较经尿道前列腺等离子切除(TUBVP)和经尿道钬激光剜除术(HOLEP)治疗大体积BPH的疗效和安全性。方法:回顾性分析56例大体积(>80ml)BPH手术患者临床资料,其中TUBVP组34例,HOLEP组22例,TUBVP组采用英国顺康的双极电切系统(气化功率160W,凝血功率80W)。HOLEP组采用美国LUMNIS大功率钬激光(100W)系统。根据术中和术后随访情况评估两种手术方式的安全性和疗效。结果:HOLEP组的出血量较TUBVP组则明显减少(P<0.01)。在术后保留导尿时间、膀胱持续冲洗时间方面,HOLEP组有明显优势。术后1、3个月时两组患者在IPSS评分、最大尿流率、膀胱残余尿等方面较术前皆有很大改善,且TUBVP与HOLEP两组间无统计学差异。结论:TUBVP和HOLEP是两种安全、有效的外科治疗BPH的方法;TUBVP具有更易普及的特性,有可能成为BPH手术治疗的金标准。
Objective： To compare the safety and efficacy of the two surgical alternatives, transurethral bipolar vaporization resection of the prostate （TUBVP） and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate （ HOLEP）, in the treatment of large benign prostatic hyperpla- sia （BPH）. Methods： Retrospective analyses were made of 56 eases of large BPH （ 〉 80 ml）, 34 treated by TUBVP with the Bipo- lar Vaporization System （ACMI Medical Ltd, UK） at 160 W in cutting and 80 W in coagulation mode, and 22 by HOLEP with the Holmium Laser System （ LUMNIS Ltd, US） at 100W. The safety and efficacy of the two approaches were assessed based on the opera- tive and follow-up data. Results ： Blood loss was significantly less in the HOLEP than in the TUBVP group （ P 〈 0.01 ）, but the time of postoperative bladder irrigation and catheter indwelling was obviously shorter in the latter. IPSS, Qmax and Residual unine were markedly improved at 1 and 3 months after the surgery, with no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Conclu- sion ： Both TUBVP and HOLEP are safe and effective surgical options for the treatment of large BPH. Particularly the former, easier to be popularly applied, is promising to be a new ＂gold standard＂ in the surgical treatment of BPH. Natl J Andrl, 2008, 14 （10） ： 907-910
出处
《中华男科学杂志》
CAS
CSCD
2008年第10期907-910,共4页
National Journal of Andrology
关键词
良性前列腺增生
等离子
钬激光
前列腺手术
benign prostatic hyperplasia
bipolar vaporization
holmium laser
prostatectomy
