• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of endourology >Comparison of techniques for transurethral laser prostatectomy: Standard photoselective vaporization of the prostate versus transurethral laser enucleation of the prostate
【24h】

Comparison of techniques for transurethral laser prostatectomy: Standard photoselective vaporization of the prostate versus transurethral laser enucleation of the prostate

机译：经尿道激光前列腺切除术技术的比较：前列腺的标准光选择性汽化与经尿道的前列腺激光摘除术

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background and Purpose: Transurethral laser enucleation of the prostate (TLEP) using the potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) laser offers an alternative technique to traditional photovaporization. The study objective was to determine the comparative efficacy between transurethral photovaporization of the prostate (PVP) with a TLEP technique using the 80W 532 nm KTP laser. Patients and Methods: A series of 97 vs 170 patients who underwent PVP vs TLEP, respectively, with the KTP laser system at Weill Cornell Medical College from September 2001 to May 2009 was studied retrospectively. Outcome measures included laser time, prostate volume lased per unit time, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), postvoid residual (PVR), and maximum flow rate (Qmax). Statistical analyses were performed using the Shapiro-Wilk, Mann-Whitney, Wilcoxon, and unpaired t tests. Results: Baseline parameters were similar between groups, although volume was greater in the TLEP group (83 vs 63 cc, P=0.04). Median laser time was longer in the TLEP group (90 vs 50 min, P<0.001) with a higher median energy used (308 vs 165 kJ, P<0.001). The volume lased per unit time was shorter, however, for TLEP (0.92 cc/min) than for PVP (1.26 cc/min). A greater median number of fibers were used in TLEP (2.5 vs 2.0, P=0.001). Improvements in median IPSS and PVR were seen in the TLEP group (5.0, P<0.001; 55.5, P=0.02, respectively) but not in the PVP group (P=0.40 and 0.30). Median Qmax and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level improved similarly in both groups. Final IPSS was lower for the TLEP group (P<0.001), but other final parameters were statistically equivalent. Conclusions: In our series, both PVP and TLEP techniques were safe and effective. Although changes in Qmax and PSA were similar between the two techniques, improvement in urinary symptoms and PVR was superior with the TLEP technique. The TLEP technique was a more efficient method for laser prostatectomy.
机译：背景与目的：使用磷酸钾-钛氧钛（KTP）激光经尿道前列腺摘除术（TLEP）提供了一种替代传统光汽化的技术。该研究目标是确定使用80W 532 nm KTP激光通过TLEP技术进行的经尿道前列腺电汽化（PVP）之间的比较功效。患者和方法：回顾性研究了2001年9月至2009年5月在Weill Cornell医学院接受KTP激光系统治疗的分别为PVP和TLEP的97例患者和170例患者。结果测量包括激光时间，每单位时间激光发射的前列腺体积，国际前列腺症状评分（IPSS），术后残留量（PVR）和最大流速（Qmax）。使用Shapiro-Wilk，Mann-Whitney，Wilcoxon和未配对t检验进行统计分析。结果：两组之间的基线参数相似，尽管TLEP组的体积更大（83 vs 63 cc，P = 0.04）。 TLEP组的中位激光时间更长（90 vs 50分钟，P <0.001），使用的中位能量更高（308 vs 165 kJ，P <0.001）。然而，TLEP（0.92 cc / min）的单位时间激光发射量要短于PVP（1.26 cc / min）的时间。 TLEP中使用的纤维中位数更大（2.5对2.0，P = 0.001）。 TLEP组的中位IPSS和PVR有所改善（分别为5.0，P <0.001; 55.5，P = 0.02），而PVP组则没有（P = 0.40和0.30）。两组的中位Qmax和前列腺特异性抗原（PSA）水平均有相似的改善。 TLEP组的最终IPSS较低（P <0.001），但其他最终参数在统计学上是等效的。结论：在我们的系列文章中，PVP和TLEP技术都是安全有效的。尽管两种技术之间Qmax和PSA的变化相似，但TLEP技术在尿道症状和PVR方面的改善更为出色。 TLEP技术是激光前列腺切除术的一种更有效的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号