[1]陈国晓 李政含 张祥生** 范志强 朱晓博 陈鑫.经尿道钬激光与等离子前列腺剜除术的比较[J].中国微创外科杂志,2017,17(09):803-807.
　Chen Guoxiao,Li Zhenghan,Zhang Xiangsheng,et al.Comparative Study Between Holmium Laser Enucleation and Transurethral Plasma Kinetic Enucleation for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia[J].Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery,2017,17(09):803-807.
点击复制

经尿道钬激光与等离子前列腺剜除术的比较()
分享到：

《中国微创外科杂志》[ISSN:1009-6604/CN:11-4526/R]

卷:
17
期数:
2017年09期
页码:
803-807
栏目:
临床论著
出版日期:
2017-09-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparative Study Between Holmium Laser Enucleation and Transurethral Plasma Kinetic Enucleation for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
作者:
陈国晓 李政含 张祥生** 范志强 朱晓博 陈鑫
河南省人民医院泌尿外科郑州大学人民医院，郑州450003
Author(s):
Chen Guoxiao;  Li Zhenghan;  Zhang Xiangsheng;  et al.
Department of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital ＆ People’s Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450003, China
关键词:
钬激光; 经尿道等离子前列腺剜除术; 前列腺增生
Keywords:
Holmium laser; Transurethral plasma kinetic enucleation of prostate; Benign prostatic hyperplasia
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的比较经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术（holmium laser enucleation of the prostate，HoLEP）和经尿道等离子前列腺剜除术（transurethral plasma kinetic enucleation of prostate，TUPKEP）治疗良性前列腺增生(benign prostatic hyperplasia，BPH)的效果。方法回顾性分析2014年6月~2016年11月98例BPH资料，按患者意愿选择术式。50例行HoLEP，48例行TUPKEP，比较2组手术指标及术后3个月生活质量（quality of life，QOL）评分，最大尿流率（Qmax），国际前列腺症状评分（international prostate symptom score，IPSS），残余尿量(residual urine volume，RUV)。结果与TUPKEP组比较，HoLEP组手术时间长［（76.5±12.8）min vs.（57.9±18.3）min，t=5.850，P=0.000］，但术中出血少［（128.5±32.7）ml vs.（188.7±395）ml,t=-8.232，P=0.000］，膀胱冲洗时间、尿管留置时间、住院时间短［（2.6±0.9）d vs.（3.5±0.3）d,t=-6.585,P=0000;（2.8±1.2）d vs.（4.6±1.4）d,t=-6.843,P=0.000;（5.7±1.1）d vs.（8.2±1.6）d,t=-9.045,P=0.000］，2组总体术后并发症发生率无显著性差异（P>0.05）。术后3个月，2组IPSS、QOL评分、Qmax、RUV均较术前明显改善（P=0.000），但2组之间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论两种术式治疗BPH均安全、有效、微创。相比较而言，HoLEP在安全性、术后恢复时间等方面更有优势。
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo compare the safety and efficacy between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and transurethral plasma kinetic enucleation of prostate (TUPKEP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).MethodsA total of 98 patients with BPH from June 2014 to November 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. All the patients were divided into either HoLEP groups (50 cases) or TUPKEP groups (48 cases) according to patient’s wishes. The operation data and therapeutic results such as international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life(QOL) score, Qmax, and residual urine volume (RUV) in 3 months after operation were compared and analyzed.ResultsThe time of operation for HoLEP was longer than that for TUPKEP ［(76.5±12.8) min vs. (57.9±18.3) min, t=5.850, P=0.000］. However, the blood loss in operation, the time of bladder irrigating after operation, the time of catheterization, and hospital stay time were less in HoLEP group than those in TUPKEP group ［(128.5±32.7) ml vs. (188.7±39.5) ml, t=-8.232, P=0.000; (2.6±0.9) d vs. (3.5±03) d, t=-6.585, P=0000; (2.8±1.2) d vs. (4.6±1.4) d, t=-6.843, P=0.000; (5.7±1.1) d vs. (8.2±1.6) d, t=-9.045, P=0.000］. There was no significant difference in the overall postoperative complication rate (P>0.05). The IPSS, QOL score, Qmax and RUV were significantly improved after 3 months postoperatively in both groups (P=0.000), but there were no significant differences between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionsBoth surgical treatment of BPH are safe, effective and minimal invasive. In comparison, HoLEP has more advantages in terms of safety and postoperative recovery.

参考文献/References:

[1]马海,李杨,周文奇,等.经尿道双极等离子腔内前列腺剜除术治疗前列腺增生症(附360例报告).中国微创外科杂志,2016,16(6):495-497.
[2]Fayad AS,Sheikh MG,Zakaria T,et al.Holmium laser enucleation versus bipolar resection of the prostate:a prospective randomized study.Which to choose?J Endourol,2011,25(8):1347-1352.
[3]刘可,肖春雷,马潞林,等.钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生的自学学习曲线.中国微创外科杂志,2016,16(1):31-34.
[4]Vuichoud C,Loughlin KR.Benign prostatic hyperplasia:epidemiology,economics and evaluation.Can J Urol,2015,22 Suppl 1:1-6.
[5]范志强,刘中华,朱晓博,等.经尿道前列腺双极等离子剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生症的临床疗效分析.微创泌尿外科杂志,2016,5(3)：158-162.
[6]Barski D,Richter M,Winter C,et al.Holmium laser ablation of the prostate (HoLAP):intermediate-term results of 144 patients.World J Urol,2013,31(5):1253-1259.
[7]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.第三军医大学学报,2016,38(3):297-301.
[8]刘宏伟,左玲,柳建军,等.经尿道等离子前列腺剜除术与电切术治疗大体积前列腺增生疗效比较.中国男科学杂志,2015,29(11):45-48.
[9]王忠，陈彦博，陈其，等.经尿道前列腺钬激光剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生的疗效研究.现代泌尿外科杂志，2013,18(6):535-537.
[10]王锦涛,张秀利,陈文峰,等.钬激光在泌尿外科中的应用.中国医师杂志,2015,增刊（下册）:242-243.
[11]杨俊,高彦俊,李冲,等.钬激光前列腺剜除术与开放前列腺切除术治疗重度前列腺增生的Meta分析.临床泌尿外科杂志,2016，31(9):797-802.
[12]邵光峰,袁明振,马永涛,等.经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生的临床应用及评价.中华临床医师杂志（电子版）,2014,8(14):13-16.
[13]蔡芳震,陈俊毅,李毅宁,等.TPKEP及HoLEP手术并发症的Clavien-Dindo分级评价及术后性功能比较.暨南大学学报:自然科学与医学版,2016，37(6):503-508.
[14]Shigemura K,Yamamichi F,Kitagawa K,et al.Does the surgeon’s experience affect operation times,adverse events and continence outcomes in HoLEP? A review of over 1000 cases.J Urol,2017 Apr 26.［Epub ahead of print］
[15]Krambeck AE,Handa SE,Lingeman JE.Experience with more than 1000 Holmium laser prostate enucleations for benign prostatic hyperplasia.J Urol,2013,189(1 Suppl):S141-S145.
[16]陈斌，郑嘉欣，张开颜，等.经尿道前列腺剜除术与电切术治疗不同质量良性前列腺增生的前瞻性研究.中华泌尿外科杂志，2013，34(8):608-612.
[17]王永忠,刘建平,梁胜军,等.老年人群前列腺体积与其剜除术后尿失禁发生的探讨.广州医学院学报,2016,44(2):76-78.
[18]沈俊文,杜传军,白福鼎,等.TURP及HoLEP对合并膀胱逼尿肌活动过度的BPH手术效果的比较.中华男科学杂志,2016,22(8):720-724.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
基金项目：河南省自然科学基金（编号：162300410309）；河南省男科学基础与临床研究院士工作站基金（2016年）**通讯作者，E-mail：zxs9818@126.com
更新日期/Last Update: 2017-11-27