Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica > Past Issues > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2016 August;68(4) > Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2016 August;68(4):330-6

ISSUES AND ARTICLES   MOST READ   eTOC

CURRENT ISSUEMINERVA UROLOGICA E NEFROLOGICA

A Journal on Nephrology and Urology

Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 0,536

Frequency: Bi-Monthly

ISSN 0393-2249

Online ISSN 1827-1758

 

Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica 2016 August;68(4):330-6

UROLOGY 

    ORIGINAL ARTICLES

A prospective comparative study of channel photoselective vaporization of the prostate vs. channel transurethral resection of the prostate in patients with advanced prostate carcinoma

Niraj KUMAR, Pawan VASUDEVA, Anup KUMAR, Harbinder SINGH, Ashmika SINHA

Department of Urology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjang Hospital, New Delhi, India

BACKGROUND: To compare short-term efficacy and safety of channel photoselective vaporization of prostate (PVP) and channel transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) in patients with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) secondary to advanced carcinoma prostate.
METHODS: This prospective, non-randomized comparative study was conducted between April 2012 and December 2014. Patients with locally advanced/metastatic carcinoma prostate, who underwent either channel PVP or channel TURP for troublesome LUTS/ acute retention of urine were included in the study. Preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative and follow up data at 1, 3 and 6 months was recorded for analysis.
RESULTS: Data analysis of 34 and 37 patients, who underwent channel PVP and channel TURP respectively, were performed. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar with no statistical difference noted between them. Though the operative duration was significantly higher in channel PVP group; perioperative blood loss, need for postoperative irrigation, duration of postoperative irrigation and catheterization were significantly lesser compared to channel TURP group. Clot retention rates were significantly higher in channel TURP group. The efficacy parameters were comparable between the two groups at 6 months’ follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Channel KTP-PVP is an efficacious alternative to channel TURP in the management of BOO secondary to advanced carcinoma prostate with the added advantages of significantly less perioperative blood loss, no requirement for blood transfusion and a short catheterization time.

language: English


FULL TEXT  REPRINTS

top of page