Safety And Efficacy Between TUEP And TURP For The Treatment Of High-risk BPH Patients

Objectives:1. To analysis the clinical features of high-risk benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).2. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of transurethral evaporation of prostate (TUEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the treatment of high-risk BPH patients.Methods:We retrospectively reviewed100patients who underwent TUEP or TURP for high-risk BPH from March2011to October2012. Patients were stratified into two groups, TUEP treatment group (observation group, n=50) and TURP treatment group (control group, n=50). All cases were assessed preoperatively by age, course of disease, IPSS, quality of life score (QOL), maximum flow rate(Qmax) and post-voiding residual urinary volume (PVR).The intraoperative blood loss, operation time, resected tissue weight, postoperative complications, bladder irrigating time, catheter time and hospital stay were also compared between two groups. All patients were followed3month postoperatively with IPSS,QOL,Qmax and PVR. Results:There were no significant differences between the two surgical groups pre-operatively (P>0.05). In TUEP group (prostatic weight>80g), the intraoperative blood loss, operating time were significantly lower than those of TURP group (P<0.05),but the resected tissue weight was significantly higher than that of TURP group(P<0.05). TUEP was superior to TURP in terms of postoperative complications, mean bladder irrigating time, mean catheter time and hospital stay. No statistically significant difference was determined in terms of IPSS, QOL, Qmax, and PVR between the two groups three month after surgery, but both groups led to significant improvements in these parameters compared with baseline (p<0.01).Conclusions:There is no difference in efficiency between two groups, but TUEP (prostatic weight>80g) has advantages in operation time, bleeding, resected tissue weight and complications.