Does the Resected Prostatic Weight Ratio Affect the Clinical Outcomes in Men Who Underwent Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate?
Vol. 19 No. 01 (2022),
18 March 2022
Purpose: Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is an effective and safe alternative to monopolar TURP. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of resected prostate weight on the clinical outcome improvement after bipolar TURP for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients.
Materials and Methods: A total of 233 men with BPH who underwent bipolar TURP were included in this prospective study. International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR) were assessed preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. The relationship between the resected prostatic weight ratio (RPWR, %) and clinical improvement was investigated.
Results: Significant improvements in Qmax, PVR, I-PSS and QoL were found 3 months after operation, and Qmax was correlated with RPWR (r = 0.1521, P = .020). The RPWR was significantly higher in patients with postoperative Qmax > 20 mL/s (P = .049). Moreover, Qmax at 3-month follow-up was higher in patients with RPWR over 50% than patients with RPWR between 0–25% (P < .05). In addition, patients with larger prostate volume tended to gain better Qmax and I-PSS postoperatively (P < .05).
Conclusion: The RPWR exerts an influence on postoperative Qmax, rather than I-PSS and QoL score, and patients with larger prostate volume tend to gain better clinical outcomes from bipolar TURP than those who with smaller prostates.
- transurethral resection of the prostate; bipolar; benign prostatic hyperplasia; clinical outcomes; organ weight
How to Cite
Foster HE, Barry MJ, Dahm P, et al. Surgical Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Attributed to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2018;200:612-9.
Sofimajidpour H, Khoshyar A, Zareie B, Sofimajidpour H, Rasouli MA. Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Transvesical Open Prostatectomy versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia with a Prostate Weight of 65-40 Gram. Urol J. 2020;18:289-94.
Reich O, Gratzke C, Stief CG. Techniques and long-term results of surgical procedures for BPH. Eur Urol. 2006;49:970-8.
Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R. Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)--incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol. 2006;50:969-79.
Liang X, Wu W, Huang Y, et al. Safety of Surgery in benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patients on Antiplatelet or Anticoagulant Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Urol J. 2020;18:151-9.
Mamoulakis C, de la Rosette J. Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate: Darwinian evolution of an instrumental technique. Urology. 2015;85:1143-50.
Huang JY, Li S, Yang ZH, Zeng XT, Wang XH. Efficacy and Safety of Plasmakinetic Resection of the Prostate in Patients with a Prostate Gland Larger than 80 cc: 30-Month Follow-Up Results. J Endourol. 2015;29:925-8.
Coskuner ER, Ozkan TA, Koprulu S, Dillioglugil O, Cevik I. The role of the bipolar plasmakinetic TURP over 100 g prostate in the elderly patients. Int Urol Nephrol. 2014;46:2071-7.
Starkman JS, Santucci RA. Comparison of bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate with standard transurethral prostatectomy: shorter stay, earlier catheter removal and fewer complications. BJU Int. 2005;95:69-71.
Hakenberg OW, Helke C, Manseck A, Wirth MP. Is there a relationship between the amount of tissue removed at transurethral resection of the prostate and clinical improvement in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol. 2001;39:412-7.
Hakenberg OW, Pinnock CB, Marshall VR. Does evaluation with the International Prostate Symptom Score predict the outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate? J Urol. 1997;158:94-9.
Kwon JS, Lee JW, Lee SW, Choi HY, Moon HS. Comparison of effectiveness of monopolar and bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate and open prostatectomy in large benign prostatic hyperplasia. Korean J Urol. 2011;52:269-73.
Bhansali M, Patankar S, Dobhada S, Khaladkar S. Management of large (>60 g) prostate gland: PlasmaKinetic Superpulse (bipolar) versus conventional (monopolar) transurethral resection of the prostate. J Endourol. 2009;23:141-5.
Yousef AA, Suliman GA, Elashry OM, Elsharaby MD, Elgamasy Ael N. A randomized comparison between three types of irrigating fluids during transurethral resection in benign prostatic hyperplasia. BMC Anesthesiol. 2010;10:7.
Ho HS, Cheng CW. Bipolar transurethral resection of prostate: a new reference standard? Curr Opin Urol. 2008;18:50-5.
Nickel JC. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: does prostate size matter? Rev Urol. 2003;5(Suppl 4):S12-7.
Hakenberg OW, Pinnock CB, Marshall VR. The follow-up of patients with unfavourable early results of transurethral prostatectomy. BJU Int. 1999;84:799-804.
Stucki P, Marini L, Mattei A, Xafis K, Boldini M, Danuser H. Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective randomized trial focusing on bleeding complications. J Urol. 2015;193:1371-5.
Szopinski T, Golabek T, Chlosta P, Borowka A. Determination of prostate adenoma weight reduction due to vaporisation process occurring during transurethral resection of the prostate. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2014;9:404-8.
Wendt-Nordahl G, Häcker A, Fastenmeier K, et al. New bipolar resection device for transurethral resection of the prostate: first ex-vivo and in-vivo evaluation. J Endourol. 2005;19:1203-9.
- Abstract Viewed: 55 times
- 6856/pdf Downloaded: 39 times