摘要
目的探讨前列腺动脉介入栓塞术(PAE)治疗高龄良性前列腺增生症(BPH)的安全性及近期疗效,并与经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)作比较。方法回顾性分析2014年6月至2017年6月收治的143例高龄BPH患者临床资料,其中接受PAE治疗57例(PAE组),接受TURP治疗86例(TURP组)。对比两组手术创伤、术后并发症及近期疗效。结果两组患者在手术创伤、术后并发症方面差异均有显著统计学意义(P<0.01),PAE组术中出血量[(4.76±1.92) mL对(156.56±83.12) mL]、止痛药应用次数[(0.12±0.33)次对(0.76±1.35)次]、术后住院时间[(2.47±1.91) d对(7.21±2.44) d]、ClavienⅡ级及以上并发症(χ~2=5.563)均低于TURP组。两组患者近期疗效差异有显著统计学意义(P<0.01),TURP组在前列腺体积[(42.93±11.62) cm^3对(69.82±13.52) cm^3]、国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)(9.77±1.71对11.82±3.31)、生活质量(QOL)评分(1.87±0.76对2.57±0.59)、最大尿流率(Qmax)[(18.26±3.98) mL/s对(13.90±3.95) mL/s]、残余尿量(PVR)[(36.16±10.67) mL对(45.82±9.43) mL]指标上改善均比PAE组更明显。结论 PAE术治疗高龄BPH患者安全、有效,可作为TURP术补充治疗。
Objective To evaluate the safety and short-term efficacy of prostatic artery embolization(PAE) in treating benign prostatic hyperplasia(BPH) in elderly patients, and to compare its curative effect with that of transurethral resection of prostate(TURP). Methods The clinical data of 143 elderly patients with BPH, who were admitted to authors’ hospital during the period from June 2014 to June 2017 to receive treatment, were retrospectively analyzed. Among the 143 elderly patients, PAE was employed in 57(PAE group) and TURP was adopted in 86(TURP group). The surgical injury, postoperative complications and short-term effect were recorded, and the results were compared between the two groups. Results Statistically significant differences in surgical injury and postoperative complications existed between the two groups(P<0.01). Comparing PAE group with TURP group, the amount of intraoperative blood loss was(4.76±1.92)mL vs(156.56 ±83.12) mL, the number of using painkillers was(0.12 ±0.33) vs(0.76 ±1.35) and the postoperative hospitalization duration was(2.47±1.91) vs(7.21±2.44) days. The incidences of the complications of Clavien grade Ⅱ and above in the PAE group were lower than those in the TURP group(χ~2=5.563). The difference in short-term effect between the two groups was statistically significant(P<0.01). Comparing TURP group with PAE group after the treatment, the prostate volume was(42.93±11.62) cm^3 vs(69.82±13.52)cm^3, the international prostate symptom score(IPSS) was(9.77±1.71) vs(11.82±3.31), the quality of life(QOL) score was(1.87±0.76) vs(2.57±0.59), the maximum urine flow(Qmax) was(18.26±3.98) mL/s vs(13.90±3.95) mL/s, and the residual urine volume(RUV) was(36.16±10.67) mL vs(45.82±9.43) mL;in the TURP group the improvement of all the above indexes was more obvious than that in the PAE group.Conclusion For the treatment of BPH in elderly patients, PAE is safe and effective, and PAE can be used as supplementary therapy for TURP procedure.
作者
吴少杰
蔡森林
唐仪
蔡文超
周艳峰
何剑锋
方主亭
WU Shaojie;CAI Senlin;TANG Yi;CAI Wenchao;ZHOU Yanfeng;HE Jianfeng;FANG Zhuting(Department of Interventional Radiology,Fujian Provincial Hospital,Provincial College of Clinical Medicine,Fujian Medical University,Fuzhou,Fujian Province 350001,China)
出处
《介入放射学杂志》
CSCD
北大核心
2019年第2期179-183,共5页
Journal of Interventional Radiology
基金
福建省卫生计生委中青年骨干人才培养项目(2017-ZQN-1)
关键词
高龄
前列腺增生
前列腺动脉介入栓塞术
经尿道前列腺电切术
elderly
prostatic hyperplasia
interventional prostatic artery embolization
transurethral resection of prostate
作者简介
通信作者:方主亭,E-mail:412421740@qq.com.
