Analysis of outcome of prostatic UroLift placement in benign prostatic hyperplasia in a district hospital

IF 0.2 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Journal of Clinical Urology Pub Date : 2023-06-27 DOI:10.1177/20514158231182509
Krishnendu Biswas, Saadat Ahmed, Kasthury Soundararasha, G. Rix, R. Pillai, Z. Maan, S. Keoghane, S. Datta
{"title":"Analysis of outcome of prostatic UroLift placement in benign prostatic hyperplasia in a district hospital","authors":"Krishnendu Biswas, Saadat Ahmed, Kasthury Soundararasha, G. Rix, R. Pillai, Z. Maan, S. Keoghane, S. Datta","doi":"10.1177/20514158231182509","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To analyse the outcome of prostatic UroLift (PUL) placement done at our hospital for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Demographic and perioperative data were collected for all patients who underwent PUL placement for BPH at out hospital from December 2017 to January 2020. International prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Q-max), complications and requirement of auxiliary procedures were noted till date. Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare the pre- and post-operative parameters. A total of 45 patients underwent PUL placement and were followed up for a median period of 26 months (range 14–37 months). The median age of the patients and prostate volume were 76 years (range 54–90 years) and 50 mL (range 30–70 mL), respectively. Five patients had median lobe. An average of 3.2 ± 1.1 clips were placed. The mean IPSS, QoL and Q-max in the pre-operative and latest follow-up period were 19.3 ± 5.9 and 11.1 ± 5.6 ( p < 0.001), 4.3 ± 1.1 and 2.5 ± 1.4 ( p < 0.001), 9.8 ± 5.0 mL/s and 12.8 ± 6.2 mL/s ( p = 0.004), respectively. Complications were dysuria (one patient, 2.2%), urinary tract infection (one patient, 2.2%), haematuria (one patient, 2.2%), transient urinary retention (two patients, 4.4%), post-void dribbling (two patients, 4.4%), bladder stone (one patient, 2.2%) and clip migration (one patient 2.2%). Six patients (13.3%) required auxiliary treatment in follow-up. PUL placement improved the IPSS, QoL and Q-max significantly over a median follow-up of 26 months with retreatment rate of 13.3%. It is a safe procedure with few easily manageable complications. Not applicable","PeriodicalId":15471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20514158231182509","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To analyse the outcome of prostatic UroLift (PUL) placement done at our hospital for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Demographic and perioperative data were collected for all patients who underwent PUL placement for BPH at out hospital from December 2017 to January 2020. International prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Q-max), complications and requirement of auxiliary procedures were noted till date. Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare the pre- and post-operative parameters. A total of 45 patients underwent PUL placement and were followed up for a median period of 26 months (range 14–37 months). The median age of the patients and prostate volume were 76 years (range 54–90 years) and 50 mL (range 30–70 mL), respectively. Five patients had median lobe. An average of 3.2 ± 1.1 clips were placed. The mean IPSS, QoL and Q-max in the pre-operative and latest follow-up period were 19.3 ± 5.9 and 11.1 ± 5.6 ( p < 0.001), 4.3 ± 1.1 and 2.5 ± 1.4 ( p < 0.001), 9.8 ± 5.0 mL/s and 12.8 ± 6.2 mL/s ( p = 0.004), respectively. Complications were dysuria (one patient, 2.2%), urinary tract infection (one patient, 2.2%), haematuria (one patient, 2.2%), transient urinary retention (two patients, 4.4%), post-void dribbling (two patients, 4.4%), bladder stone (one patient, 2.2%) and clip migration (one patient 2.2%). Six patients (13.3%) required auxiliary treatment in follow-up. PUL placement improved the IPSS, QoL and Q-max significantly over a median follow-up of 26 months with retreatment rate of 13.3%. It is a safe procedure with few easily manageable complications. Not applicable
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
某地区医院前列腺UroLift置入术治疗良性前列腺增生的疗效分析
目的分析在我院行前列腺提尿器(PUL)置入治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)的效果。从2017年12月至2020年1月,收集了所有在院外接受前列腺增生患者PUL置入术的人口统计学和围手术期数据。记录国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量(QoL)、最大尿流率(Q-max)、并发症及辅助手术需求。采用Mann-Whitney U检验比较术前和术后参数。共有45例患者接受了PUL放置,随访时间中位数为26个月(14-37个月)。患者的中位年龄和前列腺体积分别为76岁(54-90岁)和50 mL (30-70 mL)。5例中叶。平均放置3.2±1.1个夹。术前和随访末IPSS、QoL和Q-max分别为19.3±5.9和11.1±5.6 (p < 0.001)、4.3±1.1和2.5±1.4 (p < 0.001)、9.8±5.0 mL/s和12.8±6.2 mL/s (p = 0.004)。并发症为排尿困难(1例,2.2%)、尿路感染(1例,2.2%)、血尿(1例,2.2%)、一过性尿潴留(2例,4.4%)、尿后滴注(2例,4.4%)、膀胱结石(1例,2.2%)和夹片移位(1例,2.2%)。随访时需辅助治疗6例(13.3%)。在中位随访26个月期间,PUL放置显著改善了IPSS、QoL和Q-max,复治率为13.3%。这是一种安全的手术,几乎没有容易控制的并发症。不适用
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Urology
Journal of Clinical Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diagnostic value of the abnormal digital rectal examination in the modern MRI-based prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. Comparison of the diagnostic utility of CHOKAI, STONE and STONE PLUS scores in predicting ureteral stones larger than 5 mm Quality of life and healthcare resource use in patients with bladder pain syndrome: A survey of UK patients Analysis of the learning curve for Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for a single surgeon Effectiveness of intravesical glycosaminoglycans in the treatment of recurrent urinary tract infections: Systematic review and meta-analysis
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1