经尿道钬激光与等离子前列腺剜除术的比较

发布时间：2018-03-29 00:35

本文选题：钬激光　切入点：经尿道等离子前列腺剜除术　出处：《中国微创外科杂志》2017年09期

【摘要】：目的比较经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术(holmium laser enucleation of the prostate,Ho LEP)和经尿道等离子前列腺剜除术(transurethral plasma kinetic enucleation of prostate,TUPKEP)治疗良性前列腺增生(benign prostatic hyperplasia,BPH)的效果。方法回顾性分析2014年6月~2016年11月98例BPH资料,按患者意愿选择术式。50例行Ho LEP,48例行TUPKEP,比较2组手术指标及术后3个月生活质量(quality of life,QOL)评分,最大尿流率(Qmax),国际前列腺症状评分(international prostate symptom score,IPSS),残余尿量(residual urine volume,RUV)。结果与TUPKEP组比较,Ho LEP组手术时间长[(76.5±12.8)min vs.(57.9±18.3)min,t=5.850,P=0.000],但术中出血少[(128.5±32.7)ml vs.(188.7±39.5)ml,t=-8.232,P=0.000],膀胱冲洗时间、尿管留置时间、住院时间短[(2.6±0.9)d vs.(3.5±0.3)d,t=-6.585,P=0.000;(2.8±1.2)d vs.(4.6±1.4)d,t=-6.843,P=0.000;(5.7±1.1)d vs.(8.2±1.6)d,t=-9.045,P=0.000],2组总体术后并发症发生率无显著性差异(P0.05)。术后3个月,2组IPSS、QOL评分、Qmax、RUV均较术前明显改善(P=0.000),但2组之间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论两种术式治疗BPH均安全、有效、微创。相比较而言,Ho LEP在安全性、术后恢复时间等方面更有优势。
[Abstract]:Objective to compare the efficacy of transurethral laser enucleation of the prostate enucleation with transurethral plasma kinetic enucleation of Tupk EP5 in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia BPH (BPH) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in June 2016.Methods to compare the efficacy of transurethral plasma kinetic enucleation of prostate enucleation with transurethral plasma enucleation of the prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Data of 98 cases of BPH in November, According to the wishes of the patients, 48 patients with Ho LEPU were selected according to the patients' wishes. The surgical indexes and the quality of life (QOL) scores were compared between the two groups. Results compared with the TUPKEP group, the operation time of Ho LEP group was longer than that of TUPKEP group [76.5 卤12.8)min vs.(57.9 卤18.3 min, 5.850 min, P 0.000], but the intraoperative bleeding was less [128.5 卤32.7)ml vs.(188.7 卤39.5 卤39.5 卤8.232P 0.000], bladder washing time, urinary catheter retention time, and so on. There was no significant difference in the overall incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups [2.6 卤0.9d vs.(3.5 卤0.585d vs.(3.5 卤6.585U vs.(4.6 卤1.4dt-6.843P0.000d vs.(4.6 卤1.4dt-6.843P0.0000.000]. Conclusion the two groups are safe and effective in the treatment of BPH. Conclusion the two groups are both safe and effective in the treatment of BPH, and the QmaxRUV scores of the two groups are significantly improved compared with those of the patients before and after operation (P 0. 050.000, P < 0. 05), but there is no significant difference between the two groups in the treatment of the two groups of postoperative complications (P 0. 05 and P 0. 05, P 0. 05, P 0. 05, P 0. 05, P 0. 05, P 0. 05, P 0. 05, P < 0. 05). Conclusion the two groups are safe and effective in the treatment of BPH, but there is no significant difference between the two groups in the total incidence of postoperative complications (P 0. 05). By comparison, Ho LEP has more advantages in safety, postoperative recovery time and so on.
【作者单位】：河南省人民医院泌尿外科郑州大学人民医院;
【基金】：河南省自然科学基金(编号:162300410309) 河南省男科学基础与临床研究院士工作站基金(2016年)
【分类号】：R699.8

【相似文献】