Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Can Urol Assoc J ; 17(1): E39-E43, 2023 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36121884

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common condition affecting aging men. While holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is one of the most effective treatments for BPH, variations of the procedure, such as median lobe HoLEP (MLHoLEP), are rarely reported. Here, we report our institution's experience with partial HoLEP. METHODS: Our institutional prospective database was queried for patients having undergone median or individual lateral lobe enucleation between 2007 and 2018. A control cohort of patients who underwent standard HoLEP (sHoLEP) was identified using 1:2 propensity score matching based on age, prostate size, maximal flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual volume (PVR), and American Urological Association symptom score (AUAss). Three and 12-month AUAss, PVR, and Qmax were compared. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were identified as having undergone MLHoLEP. At three-month followup, AUAss (p<0.01) and incontinence rates (p=0.045) were lower for MLHoLEP patients, in addition to them having shorter operative (36.5 mins vs. 64.5 mins, p<0.01) and enucleation (13.8 mins vs. 37 mins, p<0.01) times as compared to sHoLEP patients. No difference was noted between MLHoLEP and sHoLEP cohorts with respect to age, prostate volume, PVR, or Qmax. Significant improvement in AUAss, PVR, and Q max from baseline to three and 12 months was noted overall in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: MLHoLEP could provide a surgical option with reduced operative time, quicker improvement in AUAss, and restored continence in appropriately selected patients. Ultimately, MLHoLEP represents a safe and effective treatment option to select patients who may not be eligible for or face potential morbidity concerns associated with sHoLEP.

2.
World J Urol ; 39(1): 129-134, 2021 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32206890

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Patients presenting with prostate gland sizes greater than 200 cc pose a unique surgical challenge to both patients and surgeons. The objective of this study is to critically assess the efficacy and risks associated with performing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) on glands ≥ 200 cc. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a prospective maintained database, all consecutive benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients with gland size ≥ 200 cc who underwent HoLEP were included. We reported patient preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative outcomes and complications. Subgroup analysis of outcomes was stratified by gland sizes 200-299 cc and ≥ 300 cc. Univariate analysis using Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher exact test was performed to compare the two groups. RESULTS: There were 88 patients with a mean preoperative gland size of 255.9 cc (200-770 cc). Mean operative (171 vs 182 min) and enucleation time (77 vs 83 min) were not different between the two subgroups (200-299 cc vs ≥ 300 cc). Enucleation efficiency was greater for glands ≥ 300 cc (2.6 cc/min vs 2.0 cc/min, p = 0.04). Morcellation time was longer in the ≥ 300 cc group (74.5 min vs 46.8 min, p = 0.021). Mean length of stay was 1.8 ± 1.2 days and catheter duration was 2.6 ± 2.7 days. 1 (1.1%) patient required retreatment of BPH at last follow-up. The main limitation of this study is the retrospective data analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Holmium laser enucleation for prostate glands volume > 200 cc is feasible with minimal morbidity. These data further reinforce the size independence success of this procedure for BPH.


Assuntos
Lasers de Estado Sólido/uso terapêutico , Prostatectomia/métodos , Hiperplasia Prostática/cirurgia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Humanos , Masculino , Tamanho do Órgão , Próstata/patologia , Hiperplasia Prostática/patologia , Estudos Retrospectivos
3.
Urol Clin North Am ; 48(1): 35-44, 2021 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33218592

RESUMO

Laparoscopic prostatectomy was technically challenging and not widely adopted. Robotics led to the widespread adoption of minimally invasive prostatectomy, which has been used heavily, supplanting the open and traditional laparoscopic approach. The benefits of robotic prostatectomy are disputed. Data suggest that robotic prostatectomy outcomes have improved over time.


Assuntos
Prostatectomia/história , Neoplasias da Próstata/história , Melhoria de Qualidade , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/história , História do Século XIX , História do Século XX , História do Século XXI , Humanos , Laparoscopia , Masculino , Prostatectomia/instrumentação , Prostatectomia/métodos , Prostatectomia/normas , Neoplasias da Próstata/cirurgia , Melhoria de Qualidade/normas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/instrumentação , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/normas
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...