Bipolar Resection vs Enucleation of Prostate

Overview

The aim of this study is to evaluate efficacy and safety of transurethral resection of the prostate and bipolar enucleation of the prostate.

Endoscopic management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has been the gold standard for many years. Despite its promising efficacy in treating BPH, TURP is associated with a risk of significant complications and clinical limitations, including life-threatening events such as transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome, as well as high cost due to long hospital stay, long catheterization time and difficulty in management of large sized prostate so alternative surgical approaches have been explored. Minimally invasive approaches achieve equal efficiency to standard resection, but with a more favorable safety and less complications. Anatomical enucleation of the prostate using Bipolar or Laser-based approaches such as holmium laser have been introduced with success and the efficacy and safety of these procedure has led to the integration into several international guidelines. Early results of bipolar enucleation resemble those reported for holmium laser procedure, Bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate was at least equally effective, and showed less complications, good hemostatic control and both shorter catheterization time and hospital stay than old standard procedure. A comparison between TURP and Bipolar enucleation of prostate allows us to investigate the true benefits and safety of each modality.

Conditions

Interventions

Eligibility

Locations (1)

Outcomes

Central Contacts