Bipolar vaporization of the prostate may cause higher complication rates compared to bipolar loop resection: a randomized prospective trial

Abdelwahab, Osama; Habous, M.; Aziz, Mohamed A Abd El; Sultan, Mohammed; Farag, Mohammed; Santucci, Richard A.; Binsaleh, Saleh

doi:10.1007/s11255-019-02280-5

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With the development of medical equipment, PKRP and PVP are becoming alternatives to monopolar TURP. Some studies have shown that the efficacy of PKRP or PVP is similar to that of TURP, but the incidence of related complications is much lower than that of TURP 6 , 16 – 18 . Liu reported that PKRP was superior to TURP in terms of serum sodium reduction, hospital stay, blood transfusion rate, TURS and urethral stricture incidence, while there was no significant difference in IIEF-5 or retrograde ejaculation 19 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of bipolar plasmakinetic resection of prostate versus photoselective vaporization of prostate by a three year retrospective observational study

Qin

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comprehensive evaluation of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) versus plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) in treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is inadequate. This single-centre, retrospective observational study was designed to compare their efficacy, complications and sexual function. A total of 215 patients under PVP or PKRP were included in the study, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to match the baseline characteristics of the two groups, and perioperative and three-year follow-up data were compared between them. Finally, 120 patients (60 for PVP and 60 for PKRP) were matched after PSM. Compared with the PKRP group, the intraoperative haemoglobin loss was lower (9.08 vs 13.75 g/L, P < 0.001) and the duration of catheterization and postoperative hospital stay were shorter (2.97 vs 4.10 day, P < 0.001; 3.95 vs 5.13 day, P < 0.001, respectively), but the operation time was longer (56.72 vs 49, 90 min, P < 0.001) in the PVP group. Urination measurements were improved for both groups after surgery, although no significant differences were found between them during follow-up. Sexual function after surgery was partly increased; however, frequent retrograde and discomfortable ejaculation occurred in both groups. In addition, dysuria incidence and retreatment were higher in the PVP group at 12 months. In conclusion, PVP is safe and effective in relieving BPH-related lower urinary tract symptoms with less perioperative blood loss and earlier recovery without inferior sexual function effects. However, the study is potentially affected by residual unmeasured confounding.

show abstract