These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Photoselective vaporization of the prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.
    Author: Fu WJ, Hong BF, Yang Y, Cai W, Gao JP, Wang CY, Wang XX.
    Journal: Chin Med J (Engl); 2005 Oct 05; 118(19):1610-4. PubMed ID: 16232345.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) remains a challenge for most urologic surgeons. We studied a cumulative cohort of patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) who underwent photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) and evaluated the efficacy and safety of this procedure. METHODS: A total of 196 patients with lower urinary tract obstruction symptoms secondary to BPH were treated using laser vaporization of the prostate under sacral canal anesthesia at our institutions. The therapeutic results were assessed using following variables: the safety and efficacy of sacral anesthesia, blood loss, operative time, indwelling catheterization. Preoperative and perioperative parameters were evaluated in the international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life score (QoL), maximal urinary flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine volume (PVR) and the change of sexual function. Patients were also assessed for 3-month follow up. RESULTS: PVP was performed successfully for all patients. There were 195 patients under sacral anesthesia and 1 patient under epidural anesthesia. Mean operative time was (45.2 +/- 18.5) minutes. The mean IPSS decreased from (26.6 +/- 3.2) to (5.6 +/- 1.4) and the QoL score decreased from (5.7 +/- 0.4) to (1.6 +/- 0.5), respectively (P < 0.05), while mean Qmax increased from (6.7 +/- 2.5) ml/s preoperatively to (19.6 +/- 2.4) ml/s, PVR decreased from 158.4 to 25.8 ml, respectively (P < 0.05). Average catheterization time was (1.8 +/- 0.9) days. There was no significant blood loss or fluid absorption during the period of PVP. Complications consisted of transient dysuria in 3 patients (1.5%), delayed gross hematuria in 5 patients (2.5%), respectively. Significant improvement in clinical outcomes were noted as early as 3 months after PVP treatment. CONCLUSIONS: PVP is considered as a high satisfaction rate by patient and a minimal postoperative complication. Hence, PVP is a novel, safe, effective and minimal invasive treatment for patients with symptomatic BPH.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]