论文部分内容阅读
目的比较经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)与经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术(Ho LEP)治疗高龄良性前列腺增生的临床疗效。方法将良性前列腺增生患者200例随机分为研究组和对照组各100例。对照组采用TURP治疗,研究组采用Ho LEP治疗,比较2组手术时间、住院时间、尿管留置时间、术后膀胱冲洗时间、术中出血量及最大尿流率(Qmax)、生活质量评分(QOL)、前列腺症状评分(IPSS)。结果 2组患者均顺利完成了手术,2组手术时间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。而研究组住院时间、尿管留置时间及膀胱冲洗时间均短于对照组,术中出血少于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),术后2组患者Qmax、QOL评分及IPSS评分比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 Ho LEP较之TURP治疗良性前列腺增生在近期疗效上无明显差异,但Ho LEP止血效果良好,对前列腺增生组织的切除更为彻底,手术风险更低,更为安全有效。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and transurethral holmium laser (Ho LEP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods 200 cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomly divided into study group and control group of 100 cases. The control group was treated with TURP. The study group was treated with Ho LEP. The operation time, hospitalization time, catheter indwelling time, postoperative bladder irrigation time, intraoperative blood loss and Qmax, quality of life score QOL), Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Results The patients in both groups had successfully completed the surgery. There was no significant difference in the operation time between the two groups (P> 0.05). The length of hospital stay, catheter indwelling time and bladder irrigation time were shorter in the study group than in the control group, with less bleeding during operation than those in the control group (P <0.05). Qmax and QOL scores IPSS scores were no significant difference (P> 0.05). Conclusions Ho LEP has no significant difference in the short term curative effect compared with TURP in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. However, Ho LEP has a good hemostatic effect and is more effective in resection of benign prostatic hyperplasia, with lower operation risk and safer and more effective.