Journals / Turkish Journal of Urology / 2022 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 1

Outcomes of bipolar TURP compared to monopolar TURP: A comprehensive literature review

Pages
1–10
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)

There seems to be no significant difference in length of stay, urethral stricture, quality of life, and operative duration.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the commonest surgical procedure for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane library using relevant search terms from inception of databases till June 2020.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:There seems to be no significant difference in length of stay, urethral stricture, quality of life, and operative duration.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the commonest surgical procedure for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Bipolar-TURP (BTURP) is being increasingly used as compared to the long-established Monopolar TURP (MTURP). In this systematic review, we compared the outcomes of BTURP vs MTURP. Material and methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane library using relevant search terms from inception of databases till June 2020. Using PRISMA methodology, 18 randomized control trials were reviewed comparing MTURP vs BTURP with a total of 8,393 patients. Results: A significant drop in serum sodium was seen in four studies in MTURP vs BTURP and while there was zero incidence of TUR syndrome in BTURP group, there were 1-16 episodes of TUR syndrome across studies in the MTURP group. A significant fall in hematocrit was seen in three of nine studies with MTURP and one with a significant difference in blood transfusion rates. There were no significant differences in the incidence of clot retention across the studies with 1-5 cases in BTURP group vs 2-12 cases in MTURP group. There were no significant differences related to the duration of catheterization, operative time, resection volume, length of stay, quality of life, postoperative urethral stricture, and sexual function. Conclusion: Although both BTURP and MTURP improve urinary symptoms, BTURP is associated with less risk of hyponatremia, TUR syndrome, and blood loss compared to MTURP. There seems to be no significant difference in length of stay, urethral stricture, quality of life, and operative duration.

🔖

Cite This Article

SİNHA, M. M., PIETROPAOLO, A., HAMEED, B. Z., GAUHAR, V., SOMANİ, B. (2022). Outcomes of bipolar TURP compared to monopolar TURP: A comprehensive literature review. Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 1, 1–10. https://ajindex.com/articles/413264

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Speakman M, Kirby R, Doyle S, Ioannou C. Burden of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)—Focus on the UK. BJU Int. 2015
  2. 115(4):508-519. [CrossRef] 2. Yoon C, Kim J, Moon K, Jung HC, Park TC. Transurethral resection of the prostate with a bipolar tissue management system compared to conventional monopolar resectoscope: One-year outcome. Yonsei Med J. 2006
  3. 47(5):715-720. [CrossRef] 3. Chee Kong H, Ibrahim MF, Zainuddin ZM. A prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing bipolar plasma kinetic resection of the prostate versus conventional monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Ann Saudi Med. 2009
  4. 29(6):429-432. [CrossRef] 4. Autorino R, Damiano R, Lorenzo GD, et al. Four-year outcome of a prospective randomised trial comparing bipolar plasmakinetic and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. Eur Urol. 2009
  5. 55(4):922-929. [CrossRef] 5. Chen Q, Zhang L, Fan Q, Zhou J, Peng YB, Wang Z. Bipolar transurethral resection in saline vs traditional monopolar resection of the prostate: Results of a randomized trial with a 2-year follow-up. BJU Int. 2010
  6. 106(9):1339-1343. [CrossRef] 6. Skolarikos A, Rassweiler J, Rosette J, et al. Safety and efficacy of bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate in patients with large prostates or severe lower urinary tract symptoms: Post hoc analysis of a European multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Urol. 2016
  7. 195(3):677-684. [CrossRef] 7. Fagerstrom T, Nyman CR, Hahn R. Complications and clinical outcome 18 months after bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. J Endourol. 2011
  8. 25(6):1043-1049. [CrossRef] 8. Me´ndez-Probst CE, Nott L, Paulter SE, Razvi H. A multicentre single-blind randomized controlled trial comparing bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. Can Urol Assoc J. 2011
  9. 5(6):385-389. [CrossRef] 9. Sugihara T, Yasunaga H, Horiguchi H, et al. In-hospital outcomes and cost assessment between bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. J Endourol. 2012
  10. 26(8):1053-1058. [CrossRef] 10. Mamoulakis C, Skolarikos A, Schulze M. Bipolar vs monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: Evaluation of the impact on overall sexual function in an international randomized controlled trial setting. BJU Int. 2013
  11. 112(1):109-120. [Cross- Ref] 11. Mamoulakis C, Schulze M, Skolarikos A, et al. Midterm results from an intern