钬激光前列腺摘除(HoLEP)与机器人辅助简单前列腺切除术(RASP)的比较:倾向评分匹配分析。

IF 0.4 4区 医学 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Friedrich Otto Hartung, Luisa Egen, Linus Breuer, Britta Gruene, Christopher Netsch, Benedikt Becker, Maren Wenk, Jonas Herrmann
{"title":"钬激光前列腺摘除(HoLEP)与机器人辅助简单前列腺切除术(RASP)的比较:倾向评分匹配分析。","authors":"Friedrich Otto Hartung, Luisa Egen, Linus Breuer, Britta Gruene, Christopher Netsch, Benedikt Becker, Maren Wenk, Jonas Herrmann","doi":"10.1055/a-2577-3748","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigates and compares the clinical safety and efficiency of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and robot-assisted transvesical enucleation of the prostate (RASP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with large prostate volumes in a tertiary care centre. Perioperative data were collected from 39 patients who underwent RASP at our centre between 2015 and 2021. Propensity score matching was performed based on prostate volume, patient age, and body mass index (BMI), comparing these patients with 721 individuals treated with HoLEP at our clinic. An analysis was performed of preoperative parameters, including prostate volume, age, BMI, PSA level, IPSS score, and IIEF score, as well as intra- and postoperative parameters, including operative time, resected tissue weight, postoperative catheterization duration, length of hospital stay, haemoglobin decrease, transfusion rate, postoperative urinary retention, Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC), and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). A statistically significant advantage was observed in favour of HoLEP regarding operative time (114.5 vs. 153.5 minutes; p<0.001), catheterization duration (2.6 vs. 7.4 days; p<0.001), and length of hospital stay (2.9 vs. 8.8 days; p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was found in terms of haemoglobin decrease or transfusion rate. The overall complication rate was lower in the HoLEP group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.051). However, regarding the severity of complications, a statistically significant disadvantage for RASP was observed based on the CDC (p=0.027), while the CCI did not show a statistically significant difference between the cohorts (p=0.098). Both HoLEP and RASP proved to be effective and safe for the treatment of BPH with large prostate volumes. Compared to RASP, HoLEP demonstrated advantages in terms of catheterization duration and length of hospital stay. No statistically significant differences were observed regarding the overall complication rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":7513,"journal":{"name":"Aktuelle Urologie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) Compared to Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP): A Propensity Score Matched Analysis].\",\"authors\":\"Friedrich Otto Hartung, Luisa Egen, Linus Breuer, Britta Gruene, Christopher Netsch, Benedikt Becker, Maren Wenk, Jonas Herrmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2577-3748\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study investigates and compares the clinical safety and efficiency of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and robot-assisted transvesical enucleation of the prostate (RASP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with large prostate volumes in a tertiary care centre. Perioperative data were collected from 39 patients who underwent RASP at our centre between 2015 and 2021. Propensity score matching was performed based on prostate volume, patient age, and body mass index (BMI), comparing these patients with 721 individuals treated with HoLEP at our clinic. An analysis was performed of preoperative parameters, including prostate volume, age, BMI, PSA level, IPSS score, and IIEF score, as well as intra- and postoperative parameters, including operative time, resected tissue weight, postoperative catheterization duration, length of hospital stay, haemoglobin decrease, transfusion rate, postoperative urinary retention, Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC), and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). A statistically significant advantage was observed in favour of HoLEP regarding operative time (114.5 vs. 153.5 minutes; p<0.001), catheterization duration (2.6 vs. 7.4 days; p<0.001), and length of hospital stay (2.9 vs. 8.8 days; p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was found in terms of haemoglobin decrease or transfusion rate. The overall complication rate was lower in the HoLEP group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.051). However, regarding the severity of complications, a statistically significant disadvantage for RASP was observed based on the CDC (p=0.027), while the CCI did not show a statistically significant difference between the cohorts (p=0.098). Both HoLEP and RASP proved to be effective and safe for the treatment of BPH with large prostate volumes. Compared to RASP, HoLEP demonstrated advantages in terms of catheterization duration and length of hospital stay. No statistically significant differences were observed regarding the overall complication rate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7513,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aktuelle Urologie\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aktuelle Urologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2577-3748\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aktuelle Urologie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2577-3748","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究调查并比较了三级医疗中心钬激光前列腺摘除(HoLEP)和机器人辅助经膀胱前列腺摘除(RASP)治疗前列腺体积较大的良性前列腺增生(BPH)的临床安全性和有效性。2015年至2021年期间在我们中心接受RASP的39例患者的围手术期数据收集。根据前列腺体积、患者年龄和身体质量指数(BMI)进行倾向评分匹配,将这些患者与我们诊所接受HoLEP治疗的721例患者进行比较。分析术前参数包括前列腺体积、年龄、BMI、PSA水平、IPSS评分、IIEF评分;术中及术后参数包括手术时间、切除组织重量、术后置管时间、住院时间、血红蛋白下降、输血率、术后尿潴留、Clavien-Dindo分级(CDC)、综合并发症指数(CCI)。HoLEP在手术时间上有统计学上的显著优势(114.5 vs 153.5分钟;p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) Compared to Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP): A Propensity Score Matched Analysis].

This study investigates and compares the clinical safety and efficiency of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and robot-assisted transvesical enucleation of the prostate (RASP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with large prostate volumes in a tertiary care centre. Perioperative data were collected from 39 patients who underwent RASP at our centre between 2015 and 2021. Propensity score matching was performed based on prostate volume, patient age, and body mass index (BMI), comparing these patients with 721 individuals treated with HoLEP at our clinic. An analysis was performed of preoperative parameters, including prostate volume, age, BMI, PSA level, IPSS score, and IIEF score, as well as intra- and postoperative parameters, including operative time, resected tissue weight, postoperative catheterization duration, length of hospital stay, haemoglobin decrease, transfusion rate, postoperative urinary retention, Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC), and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). A statistically significant advantage was observed in favour of HoLEP regarding operative time (114.5 vs. 153.5 minutes; p<0.001), catheterization duration (2.6 vs. 7.4 days; p<0.001), and length of hospital stay (2.9 vs. 8.8 days; p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was found in terms of haemoglobin decrease or transfusion rate. The overall complication rate was lower in the HoLEP group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.051). However, regarding the severity of complications, a statistically significant disadvantage for RASP was observed based on the CDC (p=0.027), while the CCI did not show a statistically significant difference between the cohorts (p=0.098). Both HoLEP and RASP proved to be effective and safe for the treatment of BPH with large prostate volumes. Compared to RASP, HoLEP demonstrated advantages in terms of catheterization duration and length of hospital stay. No statistically significant differences were observed regarding the overall complication rate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Aktuelle Urologie
Aktuelle Urologie 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
33.30%
发文量
104
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Die entscheidenden Ergebnisse der internationalen Forschung – für Sie auf den Punkt zusammengefasst und kritisch kommentiert Übersichtsarbeiten zu den maßgeblichen Themen der täglichen Praxis Auf dem Laufenden über die klinische Forschung durch interessante Originalien CME-Punkte sammeln mit der Rubrik "Operative Techniken" In jeder Ausgabe: Techniken wichtiger Standard-OPs – Schritt für Schritt Erstklassige OP-Skizzen mit verständlichen Erläuterungen
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信