...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of endourology >Comparing the safety and efficiency of conventional monopolar, plasmakinetic, and holmium laser transurethral resection of primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.
【24h】

Comparing the safety and efficiency of conventional monopolar, plasmakinetic, and holmium laser transurethral resection of primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.

机译:比较传统的单极,血浆动力学和激光经尿道切除术治疗原发性非肌肉浸润性膀胱癌的安全性和效率。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

PURPOSE: To compare the safety and efficiency of conventional monopolar, plasmakinetic and holmium laser transurethral resection of bladder tumor (CM-TURBT, PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT) while managing primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 2005 to 2009, 173 patients with primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer underwent endoscopic surgery. Among them, 51 patients underwent CM-TURBT, 58 patients underwent PK-TURBT, and 64 patients underwent HoL-TURBT. All patients were divided into three risk groups (low, intermediate, and high) based on the European Association of Urology guidelines and prognostic factors of recurrence. Clinical data, included preoperative, operative, and postoperative management and follow-up, were recorded. RESULTS: Patient demographics and tumor characteristics in all three groups were compared before surgery. There was no significant difference in operative duration among the three groups. Compared with the CM-TURBT group, both PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT groups had less intraoperative and postoperative complications, including obturator nerve reflex, bladder perforation, as well as bleeding and postoperative bladder irritation. There were no significant differences among the three groups in the transfusion rate and occurrence of urethral strictures. Patients in the PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT groups had less catheterization and hospitalization time than those in the CM-TURBT group, and there were no significant differences in each risk subgroup as well as the overall recurrence rate among the CM-TURBT, PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT might prove to be preferable alternatives to CM-TURBT management of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT, however, did not demonstrate an obvious advantage over CM-TURBT in tumor recurrence rate.
机译:目的:比较常规单极,血浆动力学和激光经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术(CM-TURBT,PK-TURBT和HoL-TURBT)在治疗原发性非肌肉浸润性膀胱癌时的安全性和有效性。患者与方法:从2005年至2009年,对173例原发性非肌肉浸润性膀胱癌患者进行了内窥镜手术。其中51例接受CM-TURBT,58例接受PK-TURBT,64例接受HoL-TURBT。根据欧洲泌尿外科协会指南和复发的预后因素,将所有患者分为三个风险组(低,中和高)。记录临床数据,包括术前,术中,术后管理和随访。结果:比较了三组患者的术前人口统计学和肿瘤特征。三组之间的手术时间没有显着差异。与CM-TURBT组相比,PK-TURBT和HoL-TURBT组的术中和术后并发症更少,包括闭孔神经反射,膀胱穿孔,出血和术后膀胱刺激。三组之间输血率和尿道狭窄发生率无明显差异。 PK-TURBT和HoL-TURBT组患者的导管插入和住院时间少于CM-TURBT组,并且各风险亚组以及CM-TURBT和PK之间的总体复发率无显着差异-TURBT和HoL-TURBT组。结论:PK-TURBT和HoL-TURBT可能被证明是CM-TURBT治疗非肌肉浸润性膀胱癌的首选替代方法。然而,PK-TURBT和HoL-TURBT在肿瘤复发率方面并未显示出比CM-TURBT明显的优势。

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