The surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction is changing over the time, thanks the increase evidence about the successful role of laser techniques in this surgery. We aimed to compare prostatic GreenLight photovaporization (PVP) to bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) with regard to lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) improvement through the evaluation of BPH6. We enrolled 220 consecutive subjects affected by LUTS. We performed a propensity score matching using prostate volume, peak flow and International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS). A total of 110 (55 TURP and 55 PVP) were analyzed. We found after 1 year of follow-up that the rate of subjects resulting in greater BPH6 recovery in the PVP group vs TURP (45.6% vs 18.2%; P = 0.001). The TURP treatment showed greater catheterization time (4.67 vs 1.25; Po0.01) while PVP showed greater recovery experience (82.4 vs 58.2; o0.01). Postoperative ejaculatory dysfunctions were observed in both groups, 58.8% in TURP and 34.5% in PVP group. The multivariate logistic regression analysis, adjusted for preoperative variables, showed that PVP was independently associated with BPH6 recovery end point (odds ratio = 3.77; Po0.01). This study showed data in favor of PVP. Although IPSS and peak flow improvements were similar, PVP showed better clinical outcomes.

Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) vs GreenLight photoselective vaporization of benign prostatic hyperplasia: analysis of BPH6 outcomes after 1 year of follow-up

Cimino S;VOCE, SALVATORE;PALMIERI, FERDINANDO;Russo Gi;Morgia G.
2017-01-01

Abstract

The surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction is changing over the time, thanks the increase evidence about the successful role of laser techniques in this surgery. We aimed to compare prostatic GreenLight photovaporization (PVP) to bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) with regard to lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) improvement through the evaluation of BPH6. We enrolled 220 consecutive subjects affected by LUTS. We performed a propensity score matching using prostate volume, peak flow and International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS). A total of 110 (55 TURP and 55 PVP) were analyzed. We found after 1 year of follow-up that the rate of subjects resulting in greater BPH6 recovery in the PVP group vs TURP (45.6% vs 18.2%; P = 0.001). The TURP treatment showed greater catheterization time (4.67 vs 1.25; Po0.01) while PVP showed greater recovery experience (82.4 vs 58.2; o0.01). Postoperative ejaculatory dysfunctions were observed in both groups, 58.8% in TURP and 34.5% in PVP group. The multivariate logistic regression analysis, adjusted for preoperative variables, showed that PVP was independently associated with BPH6 recovery end point (odds ratio = 3.77; Po0.01). This study showed data in favor of PVP. Although IPSS and peak flow improvements were similar, PVP showed better clinical outcomes.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
PVP vs. TURP BPH6.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione 224.72 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
224.72 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11769/314036
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact