经尿道整体剜除与经尿道前列腺切除术治疗大体积前列腺增生的比较分析
作者:
作者简介:

董焱鑫,E-mail:dyxdhj@sohu.com


Comparison between transurethral enucleation plus opreative rotating cutter and transurethral prostatic resection for large benign prostatic hyperplasia
Author:
  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • | |
    摘要:

    目的??探讨经尿道剜除联合手术刨削器治疗大体积(>80 ml)前列腺增生症(BPH)的临床效果。方法?回顾性分析2014年2月-2016年2月65例大体积BPH,按手术方法分为两组,剜除组和电切组,剜除组30例,采用经尿道腔内整体剜除前列腺,完整剜除后推入膀胱,更换手术刨削器,将剜除的腺体粉碎取出;电切组35例,采用常规经尿道前列腺等离子电切术(TURP)。结果?65例均顺利完成手术。剜除组手术时间较TURP组短[(48.5±17.3)vs(75.6±21.4)min,t =5.55,P =0.000],术中出血量较TURP组少[(51.8±14.6) vs (102.3±32.4)ml,t =7.87,P =0.000]。腺体切除体积较TURP组多[(78.3±15.5) vs (61.8±12.9)ml,t =4.69,P =0.000]。两组术后膀胱冲洗时间和术后住院天数相比较,差异无统计学意义(P >0.05)。剜除组术后暂时性尿失禁比例高于电切组(8/30 vs 4/35)。两组术后3个月国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、最大尿流率(Qmax)和残余尿均较术前明显改善(P <0.05),但两组间差异无统计学意义(P >0.05)。结论?经尿道腔内整体剜除联合手术刨削器治疗大体积BPH,手术时间更短,术中出血量少,切除腺体更彻底。

    Abstract:

    Objective?To investigate the feasibility, effectiveness and practicality of transurethral enucleation plus opreative rotating cutter for large size benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).?Methods?65 large BPH patients were divided into 2 groups randomly from February 2014 to February 2016. One group, 30 cases, patients were performed rotating cutter operation: conducted ransurethral enucleation the hyperplastic glands of prostate and pushed into the bladder, and thereafter operative rotating cutter were used to comminute and aspirate the enucleated tissue. The other group, 35 cases, patients were performed conventional TURP.?Results?Satisfactory surgical results were obtained in all cases. Time of rotating cutter operation was shorter than TURP operation (48.5 ± 17.3) min vs (75.6 ± 21.4) min, t = 5.55, P = 0.000; Blood loss of rotating cutter operation was less than TURP operation (51.8 ± 14.6) ml vs (102.3 ± 32.4) ml, t = 7.87, P = 0.000. The volume of resected tissues of rotating cutter operation was more than TURP operation (78.3 ± 15.5) ml vs (61.8 ± 12.9) ml, t = 4.69, P = 0.000. Postoperative IPSS, Qmax, Residual urine between the two groups have no significant difference (P > 0.05). Postoperative indexs of these were significant different compared with preoperative ones (P < 0.05).?Conclusion?Transurethral enucleation plus opreative rotating cutter for large BPH take the shorter operative time and has less blood loss but more volume of resected tissues than TURP.

    网友评论
    网友评论
    分享到微博
    发 布
    参考文献
    [1] 张亚男. 氰化高铁血红蛋白测定法对血红蛋白测定及临床意义[J]. 中国现代药物应用, 2013, 7(11): 48-49.
    [2] 徐皖江, 闻立平, 蒋祥新, 等. 经尿道前列腺等离子剜切术与电切术治疗良性前列腺增生症的临床效果观察[J]. 中国内镜杂志, 2014, 20(10): 1098-1101.
    [3] 左维, 王振中, 薛珺. 剥离式经尿道前列腺切除术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗良性前列腺增生的比较研究[J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2014, 20(9): 812-815.
    [4] 卓晖, 袁仁斌, 熊黎强, 等. 经尿道简化剜除法治疗良性前列腺增生症的对比研究[J]. 四川医学, 2014, 35(1): 41-43.
    [5] 刘春晓. 经尿道前列腺解剖性剜除术的研究进展[J]. 微创医学, 2015, 10(3): 263-268.
    [6] 张家华, 季惠翔, 包国华, 等. 经尿道保留尿道前壁前列腺剜除术的前瞻性随机双盲对照研究[J]. 第三军医大学学报, 2016, 38(3): 297-301.
    [7] 李功成, 潘铁军, 文瀚东, 等. “四步法”保留膀胱颈等离子前列腺剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生的疗效研究[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2015, 4(4): 208-211.
    [8] 闻竹, 马成民, 张超,等. 经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术与前列腺电切术近期疗效的对比分析[J]. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2014, 19(4): 230-232.
    [9] 谢小平, 关刚强, 王鹏, 等. 经尿道腔内剜除加下腹小切口腺体取出术在大体积前列腺增生症手术中的应用[J]. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2011, 26(1): 36-38.
    [10] 李树人, 郑鸣, 蒋庆祥, 等. 经尿道前列腺钬激光剜除术联合膀胱小切口与经尿道双极等离子前列腺剜除术治疗高危大体积前列腺增生的比较研究[J]. 中国内镜杂志, 2015, 21(10): 1028-1032.
    [11] 董焱鑫, 武阳, 曾锐, 等. 腔内整体剜除加耻骨上穿刺气膀胱下旋切在大体积前列腺增生治疗中的应用[J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2014, 20(6): 527-530.
    [12] 朱明德, 董焱鑫, 杨军昌, 等. 整体剜除联合耻骨上穿刺旋切治疗大体积(>80 ml)前列腺增生症[J]. 中国微创外科杂志, 2016, 16(4): 297-300.
    [13] 杨春妮, 王国新. 鼻窦内镜动力系统下刨削器切除会厌囊肿52例[J]. 中国耳鼻咽喉颅底外科杂志, 2016, 22(1): 76-77.
    [14] 麦周生, 官树雄, 冯锡坚. 显微支撑喉镜加电动喉刨削器在声带息肉治疗中的应用分析[J]. 现代医院, 2015, 15(3): 55-57.
    [15] 林晖, 张岩, 滕学仁. 经关节镜滑膜刨削术治疗膝关节炎性病变[J]. 中国矫形外科杂志, 2001, 8(1): 79-80.
    [16] 朱明德, 董焱鑫, 高晓康, 等. 3种微创手术方法经尿道治疗膀胱血凝块填塞的比较分析[J]. 中国内镜杂志, 2016, 22(1): 58-61.
    引证文献
引用本文

朱明德,董焱鑫,高晓康,杨军昌,霍双进,曾锐,李东,尼加提.经尿道整体剜除与经尿道前列腺切除术治疗大体积前列腺增生的比较分析[J].中国内镜杂志,2016,22(11):66-70

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:818
  • 下载次数: 483
历史
  • 收稿日期:2016-06-03
  • 在线发布日期: 2016-11-30
二维码
中国内镜杂志声明
关闭