Journals / Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology / 2014 / Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 3

Plasmakinetic vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate: Six-year results

Pages
134–137
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Compared to standard TURP, PKVP was found to be unsuccessful in the treatment of BPH when long-term outcomes were considered.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) is becoming more prevalent in parallel to the changing de- mographic structures of the community.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and methods: Of the 75 patients who were admitted to our outpatient clinic between 2001 and 2003 with lower urinary tract complaints and who were randomized into two groups (transurethral resection (TUR) and PKVP), 36 were enrolled to study and completed a follow-up period of 72 months.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Compared to standard TURP, PKVP was found to be unsuccessful in the treatment of BPH when long-term outcomes were considered.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2001 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) is becoming more prevalent in parallel to the changing de- mographic structures of the community. Transurethral resection is still considered the most effective treat- ment. Due to advances in technology, different treatment modalities are being attempted. In our study, we compared the long-term results of standard transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) with plasmakinetic vaporization of prostate (PKVP, Gyrus Medical Ltd., Bucks, UK). Material and methods: Of the 75 patients who were admitted to our outpatient clinic between 2001 and 2003 with lower urinary tract complaints and who were randomized into two groups (transurethral resection (TUR) and PKVP), 36 were enrolled to study and completed a follow-up period of 72 months. Results: Both groups were equal in terms of age and preoperative parameters. The preoperative maximum urofow rate (Qmax) in the PKVP group was 6 (2.3) mL/s and the rates were 21.8 (3.4) and 20.1 (3.1) during the control visits at 36 and 72 months, respectively. For the PKVP group, these rates were 6 (3.1), 14.4 (2.6), and 15.6 (2.8), respectively. In terms of the international prostate symptom score (IPSS), for the TUR group, these values were 22 (3.8), 5.7 (1.2), and 7.9 (2.6). For the PKVP group, the respective values were 21 (3.4), 7.6 (1.4), and 11 (2.4). The IPSS and Qmax values measured at the 36 th and 72 nd months for both groups were signifcantly different from each other (p<0.05). Conclusion: Compared to standard TURP, PKVP was found to be unsuccessful in the treatment of BPH when long-term outcomes were considered.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOCA, O., KELEŞ, M. O., KAYA, C., GÜNEŞ, M., ÖZTÜRK, M., KARAMAN, M. İ. (2014). Plasmakinetic vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate: Six-year results. Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 3, 134–137. https://ajindex.com/articles/328025

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Yang Q, Peters TJ, Donovan JL, Wilt TJ, Abrams P. Transurethral incision compared with transurethral resection of the prostate for bladder outlet obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Urol 2001
  2. [CrossRef] 2. Djavan B, Eckersberger E, Handl MJ, Brandner R, Sadri H, Lepor H. Durability and retreatment rates of minimal invasive treatments of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a cross-analysis of the literature. Can J Urol 2010
  3. Van Hest P, D’Ancona F. Update in minimal invasive therapy in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Minerva Urol Nefrol 2009
  4. Perlmutter AP, Schulsinger DA. The “Wedge” resection device for electrosurgical transurethral prostatectomy. J Endourol 1998
  5. [CrossRef] 5. AUA Practice Guidelines Committee. AUA guideline on management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (2003). Chapter 1: Diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol 2003
  6. [CrossRef] 6. Madersbacher S, Alivizatos G, Nordling J, Sanz CR, Emberton M, de la Rosette JJ. EAU 2004 guidelines on assessment, therapy and follow-up of men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (BPH guidelines). Eur Urol 2004
  7. [CrossRef] 7. Madersbacher S, Marberger M. Is transurethral resection of the prostate still justified? BJU Int 1999
  8. [CrossRef] 8. Karaman MI, Kaya C, Ozturk M, Gurdal M, Kirecci S, Pirincci N. Comparison of transurethral vaporization using PlasmaKinetic energy and transurethral resection of prostate: 1-year follow-up. J Endourol 2005
  9. [CrossRef] 9. Hahn RG, Farahmand BY, Hallin A, Hammar N, Persson PG. Incidence of acute myocardial infarction and cause-specific mortality after transurethral treatments of prostatic hypertrophy. Urology 2000
  10. [CrossRef] 10. Hahn RG. Smoking increases the risk of large scale fluid absorption during transurethral prostatic resection. J Urol 2001
  11. [CrossRef] 11. Dunsmuir WD, McFarlane JP, Tan A, Dowling C, Downie J, Kourambas J, et al. Gyrus bipolar electrovaporization vs transurethral resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective single-blind trial with 1 y followup. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2003
  12. [CrossRef] 12. Kaya C, Ilktac A, Gokmen E, Ozturk M, Karaman IM. The long- term results of transurethral vaporization of the prostate using plasmakinetic energy. BJU Int 2007
  13. [CrossRef] 13. Issa MM, Young MR, Bullock AR, Bouet R, Petros JA. Dilutional