良性前列腺增生患者经尿道前列腺切除术后早期和晚期尿道导管拔除的比较。

IF 0.3 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Y. Şenoğlu, Ali Teki̇n, O. Yildirim, D. Baba, Alpaslan Yüksel
{"title":"良性前列腺增生患者经尿道前列腺切除术后早期和晚期尿道导管拔除的比较。","authors":"Y. Şenoğlu, Ali Teki̇n, O. Yildirim, D. Baba, Alpaslan Yüksel","doi":"10.18521/ktd.1326542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered the standard in the surgical therapy of lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). However, there is no consensus on the timing of catheter removal. In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term effects of early and delayed removal of urethral catheters who underwent TURP. \nMethods: We prospectively analyzed a total of 91 patients who underwent TURP. Patients were randomized into two groups; the early (postop 1st-2nd days) and delayed (7th day) removal of the urethral catheter. After the surgery in 1, 3, and 6th months, we evaluated all patients regarding treatment success. In addition, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate, postvoid residual urine volume, and morbidities (hematuria, infection, urethral stricture, irritative symptoms, need for re-operation) were assessed at all visits. \nResults: After TURP, there was no statistical difference in urodynamic parameters, complications, IPSS, and QoL in both groups. Only in the 3rd-month, the maximum flow rate was higher in favor of the early group. Despite similar results in both groups, strictures occurred earlier in the early group than delayed group (respectively 1 and 3 months). \nConclusion: These results suggest that there are no differences in efficacy and complications in groups of early or delayed urethral catheter removal after TURP. The results of long-term studies with large series should be awaited to reach a more definite conclusion. We have tried to shed light on a topic without consensus on the time of urethral catheterization after TURP.","PeriodicalId":17884,"journal":{"name":"Konuralp Tip Dergisi","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Early Versus Late Urethral Catheter Removal After Transurethral Resection of The Prostate In Patients with Benign Prostate Hyperplasia.\",\"authors\":\"Y. Şenoğlu, Ali Teki̇n, O. Yildirim, D. Baba, Alpaslan Yüksel\",\"doi\":\"10.18521/ktd.1326542\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered the standard in the surgical therapy of lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). However, there is no consensus on the timing of catheter removal. In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term effects of early and delayed removal of urethral catheters who underwent TURP. \\nMethods: We prospectively analyzed a total of 91 patients who underwent TURP. Patients were randomized into two groups; the early (postop 1st-2nd days) and delayed (7th day) removal of the urethral catheter. After the surgery in 1, 3, and 6th months, we evaluated all patients regarding treatment success. In addition, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate, postvoid residual urine volume, and morbidities (hematuria, infection, urethral stricture, irritative symptoms, need for re-operation) were assessed at all visits. \\nResults: After TURP, there was no statistical difference in urodynamic parameters, complications, IPSS, and QoL in both groups. Only in the 3rd-month, the maximum flow rate was higher in favor of the early group. Despite similar results in both groups, strictures occurred earlier in the early group than delayed group (respectively 1 and 3 months). \\nConclusion: These results suggest that there are no differences in efficacy and complications in groups of early or delayed urethral catheter removal after TURP. The results of long-term studies with large series should be awaited to reach a more definite conclusion. We have tried to shed light on a topic without consensus on the time of urethral catheterization after TURP.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17884,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Konuralp Tip Dergisi\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Konuralp Tip Dergisi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18521/ktd.1326542\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Konuralp Tip Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18521/ktd.1326542","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:经尿道前列腺切除术(TURP)被认为是治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)相关下尿路症状的标准手术方法。然而,对于移除导管的时间,目前还没有达成一致意见。在这项研究中,我们旨在比较接受TURP的早期和延迟拔除导尿管的长期效果。方法:我们前瞻性分析了91例接受TURP的患者。患者被随机分为两组;早期(术后第1~2天)和延迟(第7天)拔除导尿管。在1、3和6个月的手术后,我们评估了所有患者的治疗成功率。此外,在所有就诊中评估国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量(QoL)、最大流速、排尿后残余尿量和并发症(血尿、感染、尿道狭窄、刺激性症状、需要再次手术)。结果:经尿道前列腺电切术后,两组患者的尿动力学参数、并发症、IPSS和生活质量无统计学差异。仅在第3个月,最大流速就更高,有利于早期组。尽管两组的结果相似,但早期组的狭窄发生时间早于延迟组(分别为1个月和3个月)。结论:这些结果表明,TURP术后早期或延迟拔除导尿管组在疗效和并发症方面没有差异。应等待大系列长期研究的结果,以得出更明确的结论。我们试图阐明一个在TURP后导尿时间上没有达成共识的话题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Early Versus Late Urethral Catheter Removal After Transurethral Resection of The Prostate In Patients with Benign Prostate Hyperplasia.
Objective: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered the standard in the surgical therapy of lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). However, there is no consensus on the timing of catheter removal. In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term effects of early and delayed removal of urethral catheters who underwent TURP. Methods: We prospectively analyzed a total of 91 patients who underwent TURP. Patients were randomized into two groups; the early (postop 1st-2nd days) and delayed (7th day) removal of the urethral catheter. After the surgery in 1, 3, and 6th months, we evaluated all patients regarding treatment success. In addition, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate, postvoid residual urine volume, and morbidities (hematuria, infection, urethral stricture, irritative symptoms, need for re-operation) were assessed at all visits. Results: After TURP, there was no statistical difference in urodynamic parameters, complications, IPSS, and QoL in both groups. Only in the 3rd-month, the maximum flow rate was higher in favor of the early group. Despite similar results in both groups, strictures occurred earlier in the early group than delayed group (respectively 1 and 3 months). Conclusion: These results suggest that there are no differences in efficacy and complications in groups of early or delayed urethral catheter removal after TURP. The results of long-term studies with large series should be awaited to reach a more definite conclusion. We have tried to shed light on a topic without consensus on the time of urethral catheterization after TURP.
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
Konuralp Tip Dergisi
Konuralp Tip Dergisi MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信