B Djavan, R Wammack, K Ghawidel, S Alavi, C Hasenzagel, P Dobronski, A Stoklosa, T Jakubcky, A Borkowski, M Marberger
{"title":"微波热疗治疗慢性尿潴留患者。","authors":"B Djavan, R Wammack, K Ghawidel, S Alavi, C Hasenzagel, P Dobronski, A Stoklosa, T Jakubcky, A Borkowski, M Marberger","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy of high-energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) in the treatment of chronic urinary retention (CUR) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective cohort study, 29 patients with CUR due to BPH underwent high-energy TUMT. Prior to treatment and during a 12-week follow-up, the following parameters were determined: quality of life (QOL) score, peak flow rate (Qmax) by uroflowmetry, and postvoid residual urine (PVR). In those with treatment failure (PVR > 150 mL or urinary retention), pressure-flow studies were performed and compared to pre-TUMT urodynamics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 29 patients, 21 (72%) regained the ability to void spontaneously at 5 weeks. The actuarial median time for spontaneous voiding to be restored was 3.5 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9-4.8 weeks). Mean QOL score at 12 weeks post-TUMT (2.2; 95% CI 1.5-2.7) was lower than that at 1 week (4.6; 95% CI 3.9-5.8) by 51% (p < 0.0005). Further, a 55% increase in mean Qmax (p < .0005) determined by uroflowmetry was observed by 12 weeks vs. 1 week after high-energy TUMT. TUMT failed in 8 patients due to a hypocontractile detrusor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We concluded that high-energy TUMT is a potentially useful option for patient with CUR who are not candidates for prostatectomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":79536,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in urology","volume":"6 4","pages":"278-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Microwave thermotherapy in patients with chronic urinary retention.\",\"authors\":\"B Djavan, R Wammack, K Ghawidel, S Alavi, C Hasenzagel, P Dobronski, A Stoklosa, T Jakubcky, A Borkowski, M Marberger\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy of high-energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) in the treatment of chronic urinary retention (CUR) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this prospective cohort study, 29 patients with CUR due to BPH underwent high-energy TUMT. Prior to treatment and during a 12-week follow-up, the following parameters were determined: quality of life (QOL) score, peak flow rate (Qmax) by uroflowmetry, and postvoid residual urine (PVR). In those with treatment failure (PVR > 150 mL or urinary retention), pressure-flow studies were performed and compared to pre-TUMT urodynamics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 29 patients, 21 (72%) regained the ability to void spontaneously at 5 weeks. The actuarial median time for spontaneous voiding to be restored was 3.5 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9-4.8 weeks). Mean QOL score at 12 weeks post-TUMT (2.2; 95% CI 1.5-2.7) was lower than that at 1 week (4.6; 95% CI 3.9-5.8) by 51% (p < 0.0005). Further, a 55% increase in mean Qmax (p < .0005) determined by uroflowmetry was observed by 12 weeks vs. 1 week after high-energy TUMT. TUMT failed in 8 patients due to a hypocontractile detrusor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We concluded that high-energy TUMT is a potentially useful option for patient with CUR who are not candidates for prostatectomy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79536,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Techniques in urology\",\"volume\":\"6 4\",\"pages\":\"278-81\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Techniques in urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评价高能经尿道微波热疗(TUMT)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)所致慢性尿潴留(CUR)的疗效。材料和方法:在这项前瞻性队列研究中,29例因前列腺增生引起的CUR患者接受了高能TUMT治疗。在治疗前和12周的随访期间,测定了以下参数:生活质量(QOL)评分、尿流法测定的峰值流速(Qmax)和空后残留尿(PVR)。在治疗失败(PVR > 150ml或尿潴留)的患者中,进行压力-流量研究,并与tumt前的尿动力学进行比较。结果:29例患者中,21例(72%)在5周时恢复了自发排空的能力。自然排尿恢复的精算中位时间为3.5周(95%可信区间[CI] 2.9-4.8周)。tumt后12周的平均生活质量评分(2.2;95% CI 1.5-2.7)低于1周时(4.6;95% CI 3.9-5.8)比51% (p < 0.0005)。此外,高能量TUMT后12周与1周相比,尿流法测定的平均Qmax增加了55% (p < .0005)。由于逼尿肌收缩不足,8例患者TUMT失败。结论:我们得出结论,高能TUMT对于不适合前列腺切除术的CUR患者是一个潜在的有用选择。
Microwave thermotherapy in patients with chronic urinary retention.
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of high-energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) in the treatment of chronic urinary retention (CUR) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
Materials and methods: In this prospective cohort study, 29 patients with CUR due to BPH underwent high-energy TUMT. Prior to treatment and during a 12-week follow-up, the following parameters were determined: quality of life (QOL) score, peak flow rate (Qmax) by uroflowmetry, and postvoid residual urine (PVR). In those with treatment failure (PVR > 150 mL or urinary retention), pressure-flow studies were performed and compared to pre-TUMT urodynamics.
Results: Of the 29 patients, 21 (72%) regained the ability to void spontaneously at 5 weeks. The actuarial median time for spontaneous voiding to be restored was 3.5 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9-4.8 weeks). Mean QOL score at 12 weeks post-TUMT (2.2; 95% CI 1.5-2.7) was lower than that at 1 week (4.6; 95% CI 3.9-5.8) by 51% (p < 0.0005). Further, a 55% increase in mean Qmax (p < .0005) determined by uroflowmetry was observed by 12 weeks vs. 1 week after high-energy TUMT. TUMT failed in 8 patients due to a hypocontractile detrusor.
Conclusions: We concluded that high-energy TUMT is a potentially useful option for patient with CUR who are not candidates for prostatectomy.