Comparative Study Of The Clinical Efficacy And Safety Between Tuerp And Turp For The Treatment Of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Objective: This study was to compare the plasma transurethral enucleation of the prostate(TUERP)and ordinary transurethral resection of the prostate(TURP) for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia(BPH),discussion the safety,validity,clinical curative effect and the protection for preprostatic sphincter,providing clinical evidence for application.Method:115 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia who were admitted to our hospital from December 2013 to December 2015 were included in this study.Among them,45 cases underwent transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate(TUERP group),while 70 cases underwent transurethral plasmakinetic re section of the prostate(TURP group).comparising and analysing the data of follow-up indicators of the TUERP group and TURP group.Comparing the operation time,the weight of the obtained,intraoperative blood loss,postoperative bladder irrigation,duration of indwelling catheter,intraoper ative and postoperative complications,length of stay(LOS);preoperative and post operative IPSS,QOL and the ICIQ-SF.By Comparing these data with the applic ation of statistical analysis system,find the differences in operation safety and effectiveness of the TUERP group and the TURP group.Results:General conditions of TUERP and TURP groups:age(72±6.4 vs 70±7.6,P>0.05);the weight of the prostate(g)(86.1±32.1 vs 83.8±41.0,P>0.05);Qmax(4.7±2.4 vs 4.7±2.3,P>0.05);PVR(ml)(245±181 vs 227±211,P>0.05);IPSS(19.1±3.1 vs 18.1±3.1,P>0.05);QOL(4.5±0.8 vs 4.6±0.8,P>0.05);PSA(ng/ml)(8.1±12.4 vs 5.9±4.9,P>0.05);Hb(g/l)(138.7±15.8 vs 139.4±18.0,P>0.05).These data are comparative without statistical significance.The weight of the obtained organization(77.2±30.4g vs 62.7±37.1g,There are obvious differences between two groups(P<0.05).That means the TUERP group has more thorough resection.intraoperative blood loss(5.7±12.2g/l vs 25.7±14.7g/l),these is significant statistical difference(P<0.05).duration of operation(126±43min vs 115±46min),there is comparative without statistical significance(P>0.05).Time of postoperative bladder irrigation,duration of indwelling catheter and length of stay,TUERP group obvious advantages compared with TURP group(P<0.05).After the operation,hese are significant statistical difference in IPSS and QOL(P<0.05),but there are no significant between the two groups.After the removal of indwelling catheterization,ICIQ-SF(1.38±3.48vs2.68±5.31,P>0.05).Secondary bleeding{7 cases(10.0%)vs 2cases(4.4%),P>0.05},cured after conservative treatment.There is no capsule perforation in TU ERP groups,and 1 cases in TURP group(P>0.05).The urinary incontinence in TUERP group and TURP group after tube drawing{2 cases(4.4%)vs 9 cases(12.9%)}.there are comparative without statistical significance between two group s(P>0.05),and there was no permanent incontinence in both groups.There was 1 case have urethral meatus stenosis in TUERP groups(2.2%);and 5 cases in TURP group,two of them were urethral meatus stenosis,the remaining 3 cases were posterior urethral stricture.There are comparative without statistical significance between two groups(P>0.05).No death cases occurred in the two groups,and there were no complications such as TURS,bladder injury,rectal injury.T UERP group had 2cases of blood transfusion,and TURP group had 9 cases of blood transfusion(P > 0.05).Conclusions:Compared with TURP,themean intraoperative,TUERP’s postope rative complications rate,intraoperative hemorrhage and urinary incontinence occurred rate are lower,and the esection of prostate tissue is more thoroughly.Furt hermore,the preprostatic sphincter protected,and has faster recovery.TUERP hascertain advantages in the treatment of BPH in safety,validity and clinical curative effect.TUERP may will become the main trend of BPH minimally invasive treatment in the future.It has the broad application prospect and the research value.