在线办公
期刊论坛
主 管
解放军总医院
主 办
解放军总医院医学创新研究部、国家老年疾病临床医学研究中心(解放军总医院)、解放军总医院第六医学中心心血管病医学部
编 辑
中华老年多器官疾病杂志编辑委员会
100853, 北京市复兴路28号
电话:010-66936756
传真:010-66936756
E-mail: zhlndqg@mode301.cn
创刊人 王士雯
总编辑 范利
副总编辑 陈韵岱
执行主编 叶大训
编辑部主任 王雪萍
ISSN 1671-5403
CN 11-4786
创刊时间 2002年
出版周期 月刊
邮发代号 82-408
友情链接
陈晓康,范连慧,韩起鹏.选择性经尿道等离子前列腺切除术对良性前列腺增生患者切除组织量、前列腺症状评分及术后尿道狭窄的影响[J].中华老年多器官疾病杂志,2022,21(8):572~575
选择性经尿道等离子前列腺切除术对良性前列腺增生患者切除组织量、前列腺症状评分及术后尿道狭窄的影响
Effect of elective transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate on weight of resected tissue, international prostate symptom score and postoperative urethral stricture in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia
投稿时间:2022-02-15  
DOI:10.11915/j.issn.1671-5403.2022.08.123
中文关键词:  前列腺增生;经尿道等离子前列腺切除术;经尿道前列腺电汽化切除术;组织切除量;术后尿道狭窄
英文关键词:prostatic hyperplasia; transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate; transurethral electrovaporization of prostate; weight of resected tissue; postoperative urethral strictureThis work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province
基金项目:辽宁省自然科学基金(20180551143)
作者单位E-mail
陈晓康 北部战区总医院泌尿外科,沈阳 110015 hanqipeng@hotmail.comeffect 
范连慧 北部战区总医院泌尿外科,沈阳 110015 hanqipeng@hotmail.comeffect 
韩起鹏 北部战区总医院泌尿外科,沈阳 110015 hanqipeng@hotmail.comeffect 
摘要点击次数: 17
全文下载次数: 33
中文摘要:
      目的 探讨经尿道等离子前列腺切除术(PKRP)与电汽化切除术(TUVP)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)的效果。 方法 选择北部战区总医院泌尿外科2019年1月至2021年1月收治的126例BPH患者为研究对象,采用信封法将患者随机分为PKRP组与TUVP组。采用SPSS 19.0统计软件进行数据分析。根据数据类型,分别采用t检验或χ2检验进行组间比较。结果 PKRP组患者术后膀胱冲洗时间、留置导尿管时间、术后排尿疼痛时间、术后明显持续出血时间及术后住院时间均短于TUVP组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);2组手术时间及前列腺组织切除量比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。PKRP组术中及术后并发症发生情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后1年,2组前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量评分(QOL)及最大尿流率(Qmax)、残余尿量(RUV)、前列腺重量均较同组术前下降,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);但2组之间比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 TUVP与PKRP均能有效改善BPH患者下尿路症状,提高患者生活质量,但与TUVP相比,PKRP手术操作更精准,止血效果更好,术中安全性更高,可有效减轻患者术后痛苦。
英文摘要:
      Objective To compare the efficacy of transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate (PKRP) versus transurethral vaporization of prostate (TUVP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods A total of 126 patients with BPH admitted in our hospital from January 2019 to January 2021 were enrolled, and randomly divided into PKRP group and TUVP group. Data were processed using SPSS statistics 19.0. Student′s t test or Chi-square test was applied for comparison between the two groups depending on different data types. Results The postoperative bladder irrigation time, indwelling catheter time, time of postoperative painful urination, postoperative bleeding time and postoperative length of hospital stay were significantly shorter in the PKRP group than the TUVP group (all P<0.05). There were no statistical differences in operation time, weight of resected tissue and incidence rates of intraoperative and postoperative complications between the two groups (all P>0.05). In 1 year after surgery, the scores of international prostate symptom score (IPSS) and quality of life score (QOL), as well as maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), residual urine volume (RUV) and prostate weight were decreased in both groups when compared with the levels before operation (P<0.05), but no significant differences were seen in the above indicators between the two groups at 1 year after surgery (P>0.05). Conclusion Both TUVP and PKRP can effectively improve lower urinary tract symptoms and quality of life in BPH patients. But PKRP has the advantages of precise surgical procedures, better hemostatic effectiveness, high intraoperative safety and mild postoperative pain.
查看全文    下载PDF阅读器
关闭