Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is highly prevalent among older men, impacting on their quality of life, sexual function, and genitourinary health, and has become an important global burden of disease. Transurethra...Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is highly prevalent among older men, impacting on their quality of life, sexual function, and genitourinary health, and has become an important global burden of disease. Transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate (TUPKP) is one of the foremost surgical procedures for the treatment of BPH. It has become well established in clinical practice with good efficacy and safety. In 2018, we issued the guideline “2018 Standard Edition”. However much new direct evidence has now emerged and this may change some of previous recommendations. The time is ripe to develop new evidence-based guidelines, so we formed a working group of clinical experts and methodologists. The steering group members posed 31 questions relevant to the management of TUPKP for BPH covering the following areas: questions relevant to the perioperative period (preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative) of TUPKP in the treatment of BPH, postoperative complications and the level of surgeons’ surgical skill. We searched the literature for direct evidence on the management of TUPKP for BPH, and assessed its certainty generated recommendations using the grade criteria by the European Association of Urology. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of an ungraded consensus-based statement. Finally, we issued 36 statements. Among them, 23 carried strong recommendations, and 13 carried weak recommendations for the stated procedure. They covered questions relevant to the aforementioned three areas. The preoperative period for TUPKP in the treatment of BPH included indications and contraindications for TUPKP, precautions for preoperative preparation in patients with renal impairment and urinary tract infection due to urinary retention, and preoperative prophylactic use of antibiotics. Questions relevant to the intraoperative period incorporated surgical operation techniques and prevention and management of bladder explosion. The application to different populations incorporating the efficacy and safety of TUPKP in the treatment of normal volume (< 80 ml) and large-volume (≥ 80 ml) BPH compared with transurethral urethral resection prostate, transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate and open prostatectomy;the efficacy and safety of TUPKP in high-risk populations and among people taking anticoagulant (antithrombotic) drugs. Questions relevant to the postoperative period incorporated the time and speed of flushing, the time indwelling catheters are needed, principles of postoperative therapeutic use of antibiotics, follow-up time and follow-up content. Questions related to complications incorporated types of complications and their incidence, postoperative leukocyturia, the treatment measures for the perforation and extravasation of the capsule, transurethral resection syndrome, postoperative bleeding, urinary catheter blockage, bladder spasm, overactive bladder, urinary incontinence, urethral stricture, rectal injury during surgery, postoperative erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation. Final questions were related to surgeons’ skills when performing TUPKP for the treatment of BPH. We hope these recommendations can help support healthcare workers caring for patients having TUPKP for the treatment of BPH.展开更多
目的探讨分叶分隔法经尿道等离子双极电切术（plasmakinetic resection of the prostate,PKRP）治疗大体积前列腺增生（体积〉60 ml）的价值。方法 2008年3月~2013年6月我科对218例大体积前列腺增生采用分叶分隔法PKRP,即先切除5~7点位...目的探讨分叶分隔法经尿道等离子双极电切术（plasmakinetic resection of the prostate,PKRP）治疗大体积前列腺增生（体积〉60 ml）的价值。方法 2008年3月~2013年6月我科对218例大体积前列腺增生采用分叶分隔法PKRP,即先切除5~7点位前列腺中叶、11~1点位前列腺顶叶,建立标记沟。沿顶叶标记沟分别向前列腺侧叶的根部近外科包膜处进行切除至中叶标记沟处,使侧叶前列腺仅余少量带蒂组织与基底相连,再大块切除无血管供应的残留侧叶,最后修整精阜周围腺体。结果分叶分隔法行前列腺切除术均顺利完成,切除前列腺重量（52.4±13.2）g,手术时间（65.0±15.5）min,出血量（103.3±37.7）ml。术后1个月国际前列腺症状评分（14.2±3.4）分,比术前（28.7±3.0）分明显降低（t=46.216,P=0.000）;术后生活质量评分（2.8±0.7）分,比术前（5.3±0.5）分明显降低（t=41.323,P=0.000）;术后最大尿流率（19.3±6.4）ml/s,较术前（6.4±2.3）ml/s明显改善（t=-50.112,P=0.000）。结论采用分叶分隔法PKRP治疗大体积前列腺增生安全,疗效满意,易于掌握。展开更多
基金the National Key Research and Development Plan of China(Technology helps Economy 20202016YFC0106300)+1 种基金the National Natural Science Foundation of China(82174230)Major Program Fund of Technical Innovation Project of Department of Science and Technology of Hubei Province(2016ACAl52).
文摘Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is highly prevalent among older men, impacting on their quality of life, sexual function, and genitourinary health, and has become an important global burden of disease. Transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate (TUPKP) is one of the foremost surgical procedures for the treatment of BPH. It has become well established in clinical practice with good efficacy and safety. In 2018, we issued the guideline “2018 Standard Edition”. However much new direct evidence has now emerged and this may change some of previous recommendations. The time is ripe to develop new evidence-based guidelines, so we formed a working group of clinical experts and methodologists. The steering group members posed 31 questions relevant to the management of TUPKP for BPH covering the following areas: questions relevant to the perioperative period (preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative) of TUPKP in the treatment of BPH, postoperative complications and the level of surgeons’ surgical skill. We searched the literature for direct evidence on the management of TUPKP for BPH, and assessed its certainty generated recommendations using the grade criteria by the European Association of Urology. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of an ungraded consensus-based statement. Finally, we issued 36 statements. Among them, 23 carried strong recommendations, and 13 carried weak recommendations for the stated procedure. They covered questions relevant to the aforementioned three areas. The preoperative period for TUPKP in the treatment of BPH included indications and contraindications for TUPKP, precautions for preoperative preparation in patients with renal impairment and urinary tract infection due to urinary retention, and preoperative prophylactic use of antibiotics. Questions relevant to the intraoperative period incorporated surgical operation techniques and prevention and management of bladder explosion. The application to different populations incorporating the efficacy and safety of TUPKP in the treatment of normal volume (< 80 ml) and large-volume (≥ 80 ml) BPH compared with transurethral urethral resection prostate, transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate and open prostatectomy;the efficacy and safety of TUPKP in high-risk populations and among people taking anticoagulant (antithrombotic) drugs. Questions relevant to the postoperative period incorporated the time and speed of flushing, the time indwelling catheters are needed, principles of postoperative therapeutic use of antibiotics, follow-up time and follow-up content. Questions related to complications incorporated types of complications and their incidence, postoperative leukocyturia, the treatment measures for the perforation and extravasation of the capsule, transurethral resection syndrome, postoperative bleeding, urinary catheter blockage, bladder spasm, overactive bladder, urinary incontinence, urethral stricture, rectal injury during surgery, postoperative erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation. Final questions were related to surgeons’ skills when performing TUPKP for the treatment of BPH. We hope these recommendations can help support healthcare workers caring for patients having TUPKP for the treatment of BPH.
文摘目的探讨分叶分隔法经尿道等离子双极电切术（plasmakinetic resection of the prostate,PKRP）治疗大体积前列腺增生（体积〉60 ml）的价值。方法 2008年3月~2013年6月我科对218例大体积前列腺增生采用分叶分隔法PKRP,即先切除5~7点位前列腺中叶、11~1点位前列腺顶叶,建立标记沟。沿顶叶标记沟分别向前列腺侧叶的根部近外科包膜处进行切除至中叶标记沟处,使侧叶前列腺仅余少量带蒂组织与基底相连,再大块切除无血管供应的残留侧叶,最后修整精阜周围腺体。结果分叶分隔法行前列腺切除术均顺利完成,切除前列腺重量（52.4±13.2）g,手术时间（65.0±15.5）min,出血量（103.3±37.7）ml。术后1个月国际前列腺症状评分（14.2±3.4）分,比术前（28.7±3.0）分明显降低（t=46.216,P=0.000）;术后生活质量评分（2.8±0.7）分,比术前（5.3±0.5）分明显降低（t=41.323,P=0.000）;术后最大尿流率（19.3±6.4）ml/s,较术前（6.4±2.3）ml/s明显改善（t=-50.112,P=0.000）。结论采用分叶分隔法PKRP治疗大体积前列腺增生安全,疗效满意,易于掌握。
文摘目的比较经尿道前列腺等离子电切术与经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术的疗效。方法将254例良性前列腺增生症患者按手术方式的不同,分为钬激光组(Ho LEP组,128例)和等离子电切组(PKRP组,126例)。比较两种术式的手术时间、手术出血量、膀胱冲洗时间、住院时间、并发症及近期疗效等指标。结果所有患者均顺利完成手术,无1例中转开放手术。Ho LEP组的手术时间明显长于PKRP组,但在术中出血量、术后持续膀胱冲洗时间、术后并发症发生率及住院时间方面,显著优于PKRP组。两组患者术后国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量评分(QOL)、最大尿流率(Qmax)和残余尿量(PVR)均较术前明显改善,但两组上述指标间比较差异无显著性。结论 Ho LEP是一种疗效显著、安全性高的治疗前列腺增生的手术方式,有望挑战PKRP成为治疗BPH的新的金标准。
