Holmium Laser Enucleation, Laparoscopic Simple Prostatectomy, or Open Prostatectomy: The Role of the Prostate Volume in terms of Operation Time

被引:11
|
作者
Gunseren, Kadir Omur [1 ]
Akdemir, Serkan [2 ]
cicek, Mehmet Cagatay [1 ]
Yildiz, Ali [3 ]
Arslan, Murat [3 ]
Yavascaoglu, Ismet [1 ]
Vuruskan, Hakan [1 ]
机构
[1] Bursa Uludag Univ, Fac Med, Dept Urol, Bursa, Turkey
[2] Ekol Hosp, Izmir, Turkey
[3] Istanbul Okan Univ, Fac Med, Dept Urol, Istanbul, Turkey
关键词
Prostate; Benign prostatic hyperplasia; Adenomectomy; Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate; Laparoscopic open prostatectomy; EXTRAPERITONEAL; HYPERPLASIA;
D O I
10.1159/000511637
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: To compare the prostate removal speeds of 3 enucleation techniques and to evaluate how the operating times change depending on the prostate volume. Methods: Medical records of patients with 80-g or larger prostates who underwent holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP), or open prostatectomy (OP) due to medical treatment-resistant benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were classified into 3 groups according to the surgical procedure. Age, BMI, prostate weights, total operation times, prostate removal speeds, hospitalization and catheterization days, complications, and improvements on functional outcomes in the 3rd month of follow-up were compared between groups. In addition, the association between prostate weight and total operation time was analyzed for each group. Results: HoLEP, LSP, and OP groups consisted of 60, 61, and 37 patients, respectively. While HoLEP was similar to OP in terms of prostate removal speed and total operation time, LSP was statistically slower and required more operation time than HoLEP and OP. There was a relationship between prostate weight and total operation time only in HoLEP. Conclusion: LSP, one of the enucleation techniques in the treatment of large prostates, was slower and required more operation time than HoLEP and OP in terms of total operation time and prostate removal speed. HoLEP seems going to be the fastest candidate for the rapid removal of large prostates in the future.
引用
收藏
页码:285 / 290
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [42] Outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for very large-sized benign prostatic hyperplasia (over 150 mL): open simple prostatectomy is dead
    Tricard, Thibault
    Xia, ShengQiang
    Xiao, DongDong
    Tong, Zhen
    Gaillard, Victor
    Sun, Jie
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 41 (08) : 2249 - 2253
  • [43] Outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for very large-sized benign prostatic hyperplasia (over 150 mL): open simple prostatectomy is dead
    Thibault Tricard
    ShengQiang Xia
    DongDong Xiao
    Zhen Tong
    Victor Gaillard
    Jie Sun
    World Journal of Urology, 2023, 41 : 2249 - 2253
  • [45] Propensity Score Matching Analysis of Differential Outcomes in Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate vs. Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy
    Khanmammadova, Narmina
    Jiang, James F.
    Gomez, Ralph Kevin Medina
    Gao, Ashley
    Chu, Timothy Young
    Shahait, Mohammed
    Myklak, Kristene
    Lee, David I.
    Das, Akhil K.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2024, 13 (17)
  • [47] A randomized clinical trial comparing transurethral holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) with open transvesical prostatectomy (OP): 5 years followup
    Kuntz, R. M.
    Lehrich, K.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2007, 6 (02) : 136 - 136
  • [48] Transurethral holmium laser enucleation of the prostate compared with transvesical open prostatectomy: 18-month follow-up of a randomized trial
    Kuntz, RM
    Lehrich, K
    Ahyai, S
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2004, 18 (02) : 189 - 191
  • [49] Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates >70 g:: 24-month follow-up
    Naspro, Richard
    Suardi, Nazareno
    Salonia, Andrea
    Scattoni, Vincenzo
    Guazzoni, Giorgio
    Colombo, Renzo
    Cestari, Andrea
    Briganti, Alberto
    Mazzoccoli, Bruno
    Rigatti, Patrizio
    Montorsi, Francesco
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2006, 50 (03) : 563 - 568