引用本文:蒋思雄 1,王 文 2,孙卫兵 1,于 洋 1,王志俊 2,杨 玻 1.经尿道等离子前列腺剜除治疗良性前列腺增生疗效分析[J].大连医科大学学报,2014,36(3):274-276.
【打印本页】   【HTML】   【下载PDF全文】   查看/发表评论  【EndNote】   【RefMan】   【BibTex】
←前一篇|后一篇→ 过刊浏览    高级检索
本文已被:浏览 次   下载 本文二维码信息
码上扫一扫!
分享到: 微信 更多
经尿道等离子前列腺剜除治疗良性前列腺增生疗效分析
蒋思雄 1,王 文 2,孙卫兵 1,于 洋 1,王志俊 2,杨 玻 11,2
1.大连医科大学 附属第二医院 泌尿外科,辽宁 大连 116027;2.大连旅顺口区人民医院 泌尿外科,辽宁 大连 116041
摘要:
[摘要]  目的 探讨经尿道等离子双极电刀前列腺剜除(PKEP)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)的临床应用。 方法 选择大连医科大学附属第二医院2012年11月—2013年5月,具有手术指征,单纯的BPH患者共计140例,年龄61~84岁,平均68.6岁,随机分为2组。PKEP组(60例)行经尿道等离子双极电刀前列腺剜除术(PKEP),TURP组(80例)行经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)。统计每例患者术前国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量评分(QOL)和最大尿流率(Qmax),手术时间、术中术后有无并发症、输血,术后尿管留置时间、平均住院日及术后2周IPSS、QOL、Qmax。 结果 两组IPSS、QOL、Qmax术前术后比较差异有显著性意义(P<0.05),但两组间比较无明显差异(P>0.05)。两组平均手术时间差异无显著性意义(P>0.05),PKEP组和TURP组患者平均尿管留置时间分别为(46.2±12.5)h和(92.6±20.8)h;平均住院日分别为(7.2±2.4)d和(9.1±2.1)d。两组比较差异有显著性意义(P<0.05)。所有患者术中术后均无输血,TURP组患者术中3例出现电切综合征(TURS)。结论 等离子腔内前列腺剜除手术安全、有效,且具有术后尿管留置时间少及住院时间短等优点,可作为治疗BPH的一种选择。
关键词:  良性前列腺增生  经尿道前列腺电切  经尿道等离子前列腺剜除
DOI:10.11724/jdmu.2014.03.17
分类号:
基金项目:
Treatment effect of plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate on benign prostatic hyperplasia
JIANG Si-xiong 1,WANG Wen 2,SUN Wei-bing 1,YU Yang 1,WANG Zhi-jun 2,YANG Bo 11,2
1. Department of Urology,the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian 116027, China;2. Department of Urology,Lvshunkou District Hospital, Dalian 116041, China
Abstract:
[Abstract] Objective To evaluate clinical application of transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods A total of 140 BPH patients in our hospital, aged 61-84 (mean 68.6) years, with indication of surgery, underwent transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP group, n=60) or transurethral resection of prostate (TURP group, n=80). Pre- and post-operative International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QOL) and maximum urinary flow rates (Qmax), as well as intra- and post-operative bleeding and complications were recorded and analyzed. Results There were significant differences between pre-and post-operative IPSS,QOL and Qmax in both PKEP and TURP groups(P<0.05). However, the values were not significantly different when compared between the two groups(P>0.05). The operation times were not significantly different between the two groups. The mean time of hospitalization was (7.2±2.4)d in PKEP group, versus (9.1±2.1)d in TURP group, and the duration of catheterization was (46.2±12.5) h and (92.6±20.8) h, respectively(P<0.05). One hundred patients did not receive blood transfusion both intra- and post-operation. Three patients in TURP group were complicated by mild intra-operative transurethral resection syndrome (TURS). Conclusion PKEP is a safe and effective procedure, which has less time of mean hospitalization and catheterization. PKEP can be chosen as surgical treatment for BPH.
Key words:  [Key words] benign prostatic hyperplasia  transurethral resection of prostate  transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate