Abstract
目的 比较经尿道等离子体双极前列腺电切(PKRP)与经尿道前列腺电切(TURP)的安全性及近期疗效.方法 将124例良性前列腺增生(BPH)患者随机分为两组,66例行PKRP,58例行TURP.术前两组年龄、前列腺体积,IPSS,Qmax、膀胱残余尿(PVR),数值比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).监测并记录手术前后血电解质、手术时间、术中出血量、术后膀胱持续冲洗时间、术后住院天数、手术并发症;术后3个月随访Qmax、IPSS、生活质量评分(Qol)等指标.对以上指标进行统计学分析.结果 PKRP与TURP组手术时间分别为(64±21)min、(78±18)min,留置尿管时间为(2.2±0.2)d、(5.3±0.4)d,术中出血量为(247±84)ml、(432±132)ml,术后膀胱持续冲洗时间为(1.2±0.2)d、(2.8±0.3)d,住院天数为(5.1±1.0)d、(8.2±1.1)d,两组间比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).PKRP组无发生输血及低钠血症.TURP组5.2%(3/58)术中输血,34.5%(20/58)术后出现不同程度低钠血症,1例TURS.术后3个月,两组Qmax、IPSS、Ool均较术前显著改善(P＜0.01),而组间比较无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 PKRP与TURP比较,近期疗效相似,但PKRP安全性更高,恢复快,并发症少,在临床上有良好的应用前景。
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
