Management of prostate enlargement with acute urinary retention: Diode laser vaporization in combination with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate

Kai Yi Tzou, Wei Tang Kao, Chi Yun Lan, Chen-Hsun Ho, Yi Te Chiang, Kuan Chou Chen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: Transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) has long been the gold standard for the management of benign prostate enlargement (BPE). Over the years, laser techniques have been developed as major alternative treatment for BPE. Retrospectively, we compared the preoperative status and surgical outcomes of conventional TURP with those of high-intensity diode laser vaporization in combination with bipolar TURP (DV + bTURP) in patients with BPE who are suffering from refractory acute urinary retention. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective chart review study. A total of 60 patients with BPE who were suffering from refractory acute urinary retention were enrolled between July 2011 and July 2013. Thirty-four patients were included in the TURP group and 26 in the DV + bTURP group. Perioperative parameters, including operation time, hemoglobin decrease, length of hospital stay, and time for catheter removal, were all recorded. Patients were followed postoperatively with peak flow rate measurement, international prostate symptom scores, and postvoid residual volume, and all adverse events were also recorded. Results: DV + bTURP was superior to TURP in terms of hospital stay (3.1 d vs. 4.2 d), catheter removal time (1.3 d vs. 3.2 d), hemoglobin reduction (0.8 g/dL vs. 2.5 g/dL), and fewer adverse events. However, it was inferior to TURP in terms of operation time (93.2 min vs. 68.5 min). Complications are also comparable. No significant differences were observed in peak flow rates, international prostate symptom score, and postvoid residual volume between the two procedures. Conclusion: DV + bTURP is comparable with monopolar TURP for relieving acute urinary retention in men with BPE in terms of complications and functional outcomes. The combined technique can provide better intraoperative hemostasis and shorter catheterization time, with no significant postoperative irritative symptoms.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)31-34
Number of pages4
JournalUrological Science
Volume27
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 1 2016

Fingerprint

Semiconductor Lasers
Transurethral Resection of Prostate
Urinary Retention
Laser Therapy
Prostate
Length of Stay
Residual Volume
Hemoglobins
Catheters
Hemostasis
Catheterization
Lasers

Keywords

  • Acute urinary retention
  • Benign prostate enlargement
  • Diode laser vaporization
  • Transurethral resection of prostate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Management of prostate enlargement with acute urinary retention : Diode laser vaporization in combination with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate. / Tzou, Kai Yi; Kao, Wei Tang; Lan, Chi Yun; Ho, Chen-Hsun; Chiang, Yi Te; Chen, Kuan Chou.

In: Urological Science, Vol. 27, No. 1, 01.03.2016, p. 31-34.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a1fe5237b3dd4afabb3f040de056d836,
title = "Management of prostate enlargement with acute urinary retention: Diode laser vaporization in combination with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate",
abstract = "Objective: Transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) has long been the gold standard for the management of benign prostate enlargement (BPE). Over the years, laser techniques have been developed as major alternative treatment for BPE. Retrospectively, we compared the preoperative status and surgical outcomes of conventional TURP with those of high-intensity diode laser vaporization in combination with bipolar TURP (DV + bTURP) in patients with BPE who are suffering from refractory acute urinary retention. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective chart review study. A total of 60 patients with BPE who were suffering from refractory acute urinary retention were enrolled between July 2011 and July 2013. Thirty-four patients were included in the TURP group and 26 in the DV + bTURP group. Perioperative parameters, including operation time, hemoglobin decrease, length of hospital stay, and time for catheter removal, were all recorded. Patients were followed postoperatively with peak flow rate measurement, international prostate symptom scores, and postvoid residual volume, and all adverse events were also recorded. Results: DV + bTURP was superior to TURP in terms of hospital stay (3.1 d vs. 4.2 d), catheter removal time (1.3 d vs. 3.2 d), hemoglobin reduction (0.8 g/dL vs. 2.5 g/dL), and fewer adverse events. However, it was inferior to TURP in terms of operation time (93.2 min vs. 68.5 min). Complications are also comparable. No significant differences were observed in peak flow rates, international prostate symptom score, and postvoid residual volume between the two procedures. Conclusion: DV + bTURP is comparable with monopolar TURP for relieving acute urinary retention in men with BPE in terms of complications and functional outcomes. The combined technique can provide better intraoperative hemostasis and shorter catheterization time, with no significant postoperative irritative symptoms.",
keywords = "Acute urinary retention, Benign prostate enlargement, Diode laser vaporization, Transurethral resection of prostate",
author = "Tzou, {Kai Yi} and Kao, {Wei Tang} and Lan, {Chi Yun} and Chen-Hsun Ho and Chiang, {Yi Te} and Chen, {Kuan Chou}",
year = "2016",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.urols.2015.12.002",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "31--34",
journal = "Urological Science",
issn = "1879-5226",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Management of prostate enlargement with acute urinary retention

T2 - Diode laser vaporization in combination with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate

AU - Tzou, Kai Yi

AU - Kao, Wei Tang

AU - Lan, Chi Yun

AU - Ho, Chen-Hsun

AU - Chiang, Yi Te

AU - Chen, Kuan Chou

PY - 2016/3/1

Y1 - 2016/3/1

N2 - Objective: Transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) has long been the gold standard for the management of benign prostate enlargement (BPE). Over the years, laser techniques have been developed as major alternative treatment for BPE. Retrospectively, we compared the preoperative status and surgical outcomes of conventional TURP with those of high-intensity diode laser vaporization in combination with bipolar TURP (DV + bTURP) in patients with BPE who are suffering from refractory acute urinary retention. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective chart review study. A total of 60 patients with BPE who were suffering from refractory acute urinary retention were enrolled between July 2011 and July 2013. Thirty-four patients were included in the TURP group and 26 in the DV + bTURP group. Perioperative parameters, including operation time, hemoglobin decrease, length of hospital stay, and time for catheter removal, were all recorded. Patients were followed postoperatively with peak flow rate measurement, international prostate symptom scores, and postvoid residual volume, and all adverse events were also recorded. Results: DV + bTURP was superior to TURP in terms of hospital stay (3.1 d vs. 4.2 d), catheter removal time (1.3 d vs. 3.2 d), hemoglobin reduction (0.8 g/dL vs. 2.5 g/dL), and fewer adverse events. However, it was inferior to TURP in terms of operation time (93.2 min vs. 68.5 min). Complications are also comparable. No significant differences were observed in peak flow rates, international prostate symptom score, and postvoid residual volume between the two procedures. Conclusion: DV + bTURP is comparable with monopolar TURP for relieving acute urinary retention in men with BPE in terms of complications and functional outcomes. The combined technique can provide better intraoperative hemostasis and shorter catheterization time, with no significant postoperative irritative symptoms.

AB - Objective: Transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) has long been the gold standard for the management of benign prostate enlargement (BPE). Over the years, laser techniques have been developed as major alternative treatment for BPE. Retrospectively, we compared the preoperative status and surgical outcomes of conventional TURP with those of high-intensity diode laser vaporization in combination with bipolar TURP (DV + bTURP) in patients with BPE who are suffering from refractory acute urinary retention. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective chart review study. A total of 60 patients with BPE who were suffering from refractory acute urinary retention were enrolled between July 2011 and July 2013. Thirty-four patients were included in the TURP group and 26 in the DV + bTURP group. Perioperative parameters, including operation time, hemoglobin decrease, length of hospital stay, and time for catheter removal, were all recorded. Patients were followed postoperatively with peak flow rate measurement, international prostate symptom scores, and postvoid residual volume, and all adverse events were also recorded. Results: DV + bTURP was superior to TURP in terms of hospital stay (3.1 d vs. 4.2 d), catheter removal time (1.3 d vs. 3.2 d), hemoglobin reduction (0.8 g/dL vs. 2.5 g/dL), and fewer adverse events. However, it was inferior to TURP in terms of operation time (93.2 min vs. 68.5 min). Complications are also comparable. No significant differences were observed in peak flow rates, international prostate symptom score, and postvoid residual volume between the two procedures. Conclusion: DV + bTURP is comparable with monopolar TURP for relieving acute urinary retention in men with BPE in terms of complications and functional outcomes. The combined technique can provide better intraoperative hemostasis and shorter catheterization time, with no significant postoperative irritative symptoms.

KW - Acute urinary retention

KW - Benign prostate enlargement

KW - Diode laser vaporization

KW - Transurethral resection of prostate

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84958259361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84958259361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urols.2015.12.002

DO - 10.1016/j.urols.2015.12.002

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84958259361

VL - 27

SP - 31

EP - 34

JO - Urological Science

JF - Urological Science

SN - 1879-5226

IS - 1

ER -