首页> 外文期刊>Urology >Holmium laser resection of the prostate versus neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet visual laser ablation of the prostate: a randomized prospective comparison of two techniques for laser prostatectomy.
【24h】

Holmium laser resection of the prostate versus neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet visual laser ablation of the prostate: a randomized prospective comparison of two techniques for laser prostatectomy.

机译:前列腺激光切除与钕:钇-铝-石榴石视觉前列腺切除:两种激光前列腺切除术的前瞻性随机比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: To directly compare holmium laser resection of the prostate (HoLRP) with neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet visual laser ablation of the prostate (VLAP), which represent two fundamentally different methods of laser prostatectomy. METHODS: In a randomized, prospective comparison, a total of 44 men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were treated with either HoLRP or VLAP. Standard preoperative assessment included American Urological Association (AUA) symptom score, peak urinary flow rates (Qmax), ultrasound prostate volume, and residual urine measurements. Pressure-flow urodynamics were performed preoperatively and at 3 months postoperatively. Intraoperative and perioperative factors were assessed. The patients were followed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months following the procedure. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the patient groups for any preoperative parameter. The mean total operating time was longer in the HoLRP group (52 minutes) compared with the VLAP group (41 minutes) (P <0.01). The mean catheter times were 1.4 days (HoLRP) and 11.6 days (VLAP) (P <0.001). These times included the 9% of patients undergoing HoLRP and 36% of patients undergoing VLAP who required recatheterization. Immediate postoperative dysuria scores were higher in the VLAP group compared with the HoLRP group. There were no significant differences in AUA scores between the two treatment groups at any postoperative interval. The Qmax values were greater at follow-up in the HoLRP group, but statistical significance was not achieved at 12 months. However, both PdetQmax and Schafer grade measurements taken at 3 months postoperatively were significantly lower in the patients undergoing HoLRP. Three patients (14%) required reoperation in the VLAP treatment arm but no patient who underwent HoLRP has required reoperation to date. CONCLUSIONS: HoLRP results in significantly improved patient outcomes compared to VLAP.
机译:目的:直接比较前列腺激光切除(HoLRP)和钕钕钇铝石榴石视觉激光切除前列腺(VLAP),这代表了两种根本不同的激光前列腺切除术。方法:采用随机,前瞻性比较方法,对总共44例有症状的良性前列腺增生(BPH)的男性进行了HoLRP或VLAP治疗。术前标准评估包括美国泌尿外科协会(AUA)症状评分,尿流峰值(Qmax),超声前列腺体积和尿液残留量。术前和术后3个月进行压力流尿动力学检查。评估术中和围手术期因素。术后1、3、6和12个月对患者进行随访。结果:两组患者术前参数无明显差异。与VLAP组(41分钟)相比,HoLRP组(52分钟)的平均总手术时间更长(P <0.01)。平均导管时间为1.4天(HoLRP)和11.6天(VLAP)(P <0.001)。这些时间包括9%的接受HoLRP的患者和36%的接受VLAP的需要行复活的患者。与HoLRP组相比,VLAP组术后立即排尿困难评分更高。在任何术后间隔,两个治疗组之间的AUA评分均无显着差异。 HoLRP组随访时的Qmax值较大,但在12个月时未达到统计学意义。但是,接受HoLRP的患者术后3个月进行的PdetQmax和Schafer分级测量均显着降低。三名患者(14%)需要在VLAP治疗组进行再次手术,但迄今为止,没有接受过HoLRP的患者需要再次手术。结论:与VLAP相比,HoLRP可以显着改善患者的预后。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号