论文部分内容阅读
目的 比较经尿道接触式激光前列腺术 (TULP)、经尿道电极汽化前列腺术 (TVP)和经尿道电汽化切割前列腺术 (TUEVAP)对良性前列腺增生症 (BPH)的治疗效果。 方法 对 75 8例BPH患者采用 3种术式 ,其中行TULP者 388例 ,行TVP者 2 0 3例 ,行TUEVAP者 16 7例。 结果 患者手术前后国际前列腺症状评分 (IPSS)、生活质量评分 (QOL)、最大尿流率 (MFR)、剩余尿(PVR)比较均得到显著改善 (P <0 .0 1)。 3组术后客观症状的改善情况分别与另一组经尿道前列腺电切术 (TURP)组相比差别无显著性意义 (P >0 .0 5 ) ;TULP组术后留置导尿管时间、尿路刺激症状、血尿及急性附睾炎的发病率明显高于其他组 (P <0 .0 1)。 结论 TULP、TVP及TUEVAP治疗BPH均可达到与TURP相似的主、客观症状改善 ;术后并发症明显少于TURP ;其中TUEVAP操作简单 ,去除腺体量大 ,恢复快 ,近期疗效满意 ,有良好的应用前景。
Objective To compare the therapeutic effects of transurethral laser-assisted laser prostatectomy (TULP), transurethral vaporization of the prostate (TVP) and transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUEVAP) on benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods 758 patients with BPH were treated by three kinds of procedures, of which 388 were TULP, 203 were TVP, and 167 were TUEVAP. Results The scores of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Quality of Life Scale (QOL), Maximum Urine Flow Rate (MFR) and Residual Urine (PVR) before and after operation were significantly improved (P <0.01). There was no significant difference between the three groups in improvement of objective symptoms and TURP in the other group (P> 0.05). The duration of indwelling catheter in TULP group, The incidence of urinary tract irritation, hematuria and acute epididymitis were significantly higher than those in the other groups (P <0.01). Conclusion TULP, TVP and TUEVAP treatment of BPH can be achieved with the TURP similar objective and objective symptoms improved; postoperative complications were significantly less than TURP; which TUEVAP simple operation to remove the gland mass, rapid recovery, the recent satisfactory results, with good The application prospects.