We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Thulium laser enucleation (ThuLEP) versus transurethral resection of the prostate in saline (TURis): A randomized prospective trial to compare intra and early postoperative outcomes.
Actas Urologicas Españolas 2017 June
OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical intra and early postoperative outcomes between thulium laser transurethral enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) and transurethral bipolar resection of the prostate (TURis) for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in a prospective randomized trial.
METHODS: The study randomized 208 consecutive patients with BPH to ThuLEP (n=102) or TURis (n=106). For all patients were evaluated preoperatively with regards to blood loss, catheterization time, irrigation volume, hospital stay and operative time. At 3 months after surgery they were also evaluated by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), and postvoid residual urine volume (PVR).
RESULTS: The patients in each study arm each showed no significant difference in preoperative parameters. Compared with TURIS, ThuLEP had same operative time (53.69±31.44 vs 61.66±18.70minutes, P=.123) but resulted in less hemoglobin decrease (0.45 vs 2.83g/dL, P=.005). ThuLEP also needed less catheterization time (1.3 vs 4.8 days, P=.011), irrigation volume (29.4 vs 69.2 L, P=.002), and hospital stay (1.7 vs 5.2 days, P=.016). During the 3 months of follow-up, the procedures did not demonstrate a significant difference in Qmax, IPSS, PVR, and QOLS.
CONCLUSION: ThuLEP and TURis both relieve lower urinary tract symptoms equally, with high efficacy and safety. ThuLEP was statistically superior to TURis in blood loss, catheterization time, irrigation volume, and hospital stay. However, procedures did not differ significantly in Qmax, IPSS, PVR, and QOLS through 3 months of follow-up.
METHODS: The study randomized 208 consecutive patients with BPH to ThuLEP (n=102) or TURis (n=106). For all patients were evaluated preoperatively with regards to blood loss, catheterization time, irrigation volume, hospital stay and operative time. At 3 months after surgery they were also evaluated by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), and postvoid residual urine volume (PVR).
RESULTS: The patients in each study arm each showed no significant difference in preoperative parameters. Compared with TURIS, ThuLEP had same operative time (53.69±31.44 vs 61.66±18.70minutes, P=.123) but resulted in less hemoglobin decrease (0.45 vs 2.83g/dL, P=.005). ThuLEP also needed less catheterization time (1.3 vs 4.8 days, P=.011), irrigation volume (29.4 vs 69.2 L, P=.002), and hospital stay (1.7 vs 5.2 days, P=.016). During the 3 months of follow-up, the procedures did not demonstrate a significant difference in Qmax, IPSS, PVR, and QOLS.
CONCLUSION: ThuLEP and TURis both relieve lower urinary tract symptoms equally, with high efficacy and safety. ThuLEP was statistically superior to TURis in blood loss, catheterization time, irrigation volume, and hospital stay. However, procedures did not differ significantly in Qmax, IPSS, PVR, and QOLS through 3 months of follow-up.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app