Monopolar versus bipolar transurethral resection of prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: Operative outcomes and surgeon preferences, a real-world scenario

Comparative Outcomes of Monopolar and Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: An Institutional Perspective

Objective This prospective comparative study aimed to highlight and compare two types of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), namely M-TURP (monopolar) and B-TURP (bipolar), in the endoscopic management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods and materials This research was conducted between 2022 and 2023 at a tertiary care health center. Included in the investigation were 100 consenting study participants undergoing M-TURP and B-TURP at our center. All referred patients presenting with clinical, ultrasound, or uroflowmetry features of BPH and those with failed attempts at medical management were included in the study. Patients with carcinoma of the prostate were excluded from the study. Post-operatively, the endpoints for comparison included maximal urinary flow rate (Qmax), prostate volume, duration of hospital stay, duration of catheterization, drop in serum sodium concentration, and drop in hemoglobin levels. Descriptive statistics were computed to delineate the study sample. After the completion of data collection, data analysis was performed using SPSS for Windows, Version 16.0 (Released 2007; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA), and the correlations sought were achieved using the Chi-square test of significance. Results The peak incidence of BPH was seen in the sixth decade of life: the M-TURP group was 65.16 ± 7.07 years (mean ± standard deviation), while that in the B-TURP group was 62.32 ± 8.16 years (mean ± standard deviation). Nine percent of the study participants did not show any comorbidities. The most frequent symptom of BPH at presentation was a poor urinary stream (78%, n = 100), followed by nocturia (67%, n = 100). In our study, patients undergoing M-TURP had a mean serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 4.31 ± 1.03 ng/mL, while patients undergoing B-TURP had a mean serum PSA of 4.24 ± 0.99 ng/mL (p = 0.820; p > 0.05). The study found that patients undergoing M-TURP had a mean prostate size of 35.04 ± 3.57 cc, while those undergoing B-TURP had a mean prostate size of 35.72 ± 3.22 cc (p = 0.765). For the B-TURP group, the mean decrease in postoperative serum sodium concentration was 4.3 mEq/L, while for the M-TURP group, it was 6.4 mEq/L (p = 0.903). In the M-TURP group, there were three cases of transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome, while the B-TURP group had only one case. Conclusion BPH is a common problem affecting the quality of life of several male patients. Both M-TURP and B-TURP are comparable in their efficacy in treating BPH, with the exception of a higher incidence of hyponatremia and TUR syndrome in the M-TURP group.

Open prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A critical analysis of patient presentation and surgical outcomes in a contemporary series

Background

Open prostatectomy (OP) is still a valid treatment option for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), but it needs to be constantly reevaluated in the context of minimally invasive treatments (MITs).

Aim

Our purpose is to present contemporary data on patient presentation and surgical outcomes of OP with which other OP series and MITs can be compared.

Methods

A retrospective study of all OP was carried out in our institution from January 2011 to December 2020. All patients had a thorough preoperative workup and optimization of comorbidities before surgery. Data were collected in a predesigned pro forma and analyzed.

Results

The mean age of the 148 patients studied was 66.2 (±7.9) yrs. The mean duration of symptoms before surgery was 32.2 (±33.7) mos. The mean preoperative prostate volume was 118.0 (±67.1) cm3. There was a 54.4% comorbidity rate with diabetes mellitus (DM) topping the list (16.0%). An incidental prostate cancer rate of 6.1% was found. The overall complication rate was 45.3%. Perioperative hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion (BT) was the most common complication (26.1%). There was no significant difference in age, duration of surgery, and prostrate volume between subjects with and without BT (P > 0.05). Wound infection was significantly associated with diabetes (P = 0.043, OR = 3.507, 95% CI = 1.042-11.805). The reoperation rate was 1.4%, and mortality rate was 0.7%. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality-of-life (QOL) score, and post-void residual urine (PVR) volume were significantly improved (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

OP was found to be a safe and effective procedure for the relief of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) secondary to BPH. However, it was associated with high morbidity and low reoperation rate.

Outcomes of bipolar TURP compared to monopolar TURP: A comprehensive literature review

OBJECTIVE

Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the commonest surgical procedure for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Bipolar-TURP (BTURP) is being increasingly used as compared to the long-established Monopolar TURP (MTURP). In this systematic review, we compared the outcomes of BTURP vs MTURP.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane library using relevant search terms from inception of databases till June 2020. Using PRISMA methodology, 18 randomized control trials were reviewed comparing MTURP vs BTURP with a total of 8,393 patients.

RESULTS

A significant drop in serum sodium was seen in four studies in MTURP vs BTURP and while there was zero incidence of TUR syndrome in BTURP group, there were 1-16 episodes of TUR syndrome across studies in the MTURP group. A significant fall in hematocrit was seen in three of nine studies with MTURP and one with a significant difference in blood transfusion rates. There were no significant differences in the incidence of clot retention across the studies with 1-5 cases in BTURP group vs 2-12 cases in MTURP group. There were no significant differences related to the duration of catheterization, operative time, resection volume, length of stay, quality of life, postoperative urethral stricture, and sexual function.

CONCLUSION

Although both BTURP and MTURP improve urinary symptoms, BTURP is associated with less risk of hyponatremia, TUR syndrome, and blood loss compared to MTURP. There seems to be no significant difference in length of stay, urethral stricture, quality of life, and operative duration.

Perioperative Outcomes of Transurethral Resection, Open Prostatectomy, and Laser Therapy in the Surgical Treatment of Benign Prostatic Obstruction: A "Real-World" Data Analysis from the URO-Cert Prostate Centers

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study is to compare length of hospital stay, transfusion rates, and re-intervention rates during hospitalization for transurethral resection of the prostate (TUR-P), open prostatectomy (OP), and laser therapy (LT) for surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

METHODS

URO-Cert is an organization, in which clinical data of prostatic diseases from 2 university, 19 public, and 3 private hospitals and 270 office-based urologists are collected in order to document treatment quality. Data on diagnostics, therapy, and course of disease are recorded web based. The analysis includes datasets from 2005 to 2017.

RESULTS

Of 10,420 patients, 8,389 were treated with TUR-P, 1,334 with OP, and 697 with LT. Median length of hospital stay was 6 days (IQR: 4-7) for TUR-P, 9 days (IQR: 7-11) for OP, and 5 days (IQR: 4-6) for LT (p < 0.001). Risk for a hospital stay ≥7 days was higher for OP versus TUR-P (OR: 7.25; 95% CI = 6.27-8.36; p < 0.001) and LT (OR: 17.89; 95% CI = 14.12-22.65; p < 0.001) and higher for TUR-P versus LT (OR: 2.47; 95% CI = 2.03-3.01; p < 0.001). OP had a significantly higher risk for transfusions than TUR-P (OR: 2.44; 95% CI = 1.74-3.41; p < 0.001) and LT (OR: 3.32; 95% CI = 1.56-7.01; p < 0.001). Transfusion rates were not significantly different between TUR-P and LT (OR: 1.36; 95% CI = 0.66-2.79; p = 0.51). Risk of re-intervention was not different between all 3 approaches.

CONCLUSION

OP was associated with higher transfusion rates and longer hospital stay than TUR-P and LT. Risk of transfusion was not different between TUR-P and LT, but TUR-P was inferior to LT concerning length of hospital stay. Re-intervention rates during hospitalization did not differ between the groups.

Retrospective analysis of the changes in the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia during an 11-year period: a single-center experience

The present study aimed to determine whether the number of patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) who preferred surgery decreased during the past 11 years at our center (West China Hospital, Chengdu, China), and whether this change affected the timing of surgery and the physical condition of surgical patients. This retrospective study included 57 557 patients with BPH treated from January 2008 to December 2018. Of these, 5427 patients were treated surgically. Surgical patients were divided into two groups based on the time of treatment (groups 8–13 and groups 13–18). The collected data comprised the percentage of all patients with BPH who underwent surgery, baseline characteristics of surgical patients, rehabilitation time, adverse events, and hospitalization costs. The surgery rates in groups 8–13 and groups 13–18 were 10.5% and 8.5% (P < 0.001), respectively. The two groups did not clinically differ regarding patient age and prostate volume. The rates of acute urinary retention and renal failure decreased from 15.0% to 10.6% (P < 0.001) and from 5.2% to 3.1% (P < 0.001), respectively. In groups 8–13 and groups 13–18, the mean catheterization times were 4.0 ± 1.7 days and 3.3 ± 1.6 days (P < 0.001), respectively, and the mean postoperative hospitalization times were 5.1 ± 2.4 days and 4.2 ± 1.8 days (P < 0.001), respectively. The incidences of unplanned second surgery and death reduced during the study period. The surgery rate decreased over time, which suggests that medication was chosen over surgery. However, the percentage of late complications of BPH also decreased over time, which indicates that the timing of surgery was not delayed.

Laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate: perioperative outcomes from the ACS NSQIP database

PURPOSE

To compare the perioperative outcomes associated with laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) using a national database.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was reviewed for patients who underwent TURP or LEP from 2008 to 2016. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and predisposition to bleeding were compared between TURP and LEP. The 30-day perioperative outcomes including operative time, length of hospital stay (LOS), return to the operating room (OR), bleeding requiring transfusion, and organ system-specific complications were compared between the procedures. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed, adjusting for the type of surgery and other covariates.

RESULTS

The series included 37,577 TURP and 2869 LEP procedures. While TURP was associated with a shorter operative time (55.20 ± 37.80 min) than LEP (102.80 ± 62.30 min), the latter was associated with a shorter hospital stay (1.29 ± 2.73 days) than TURP (2.05 ± 5.20 days). Compared to TURP, LEP had 0.52 (0.47-0.58) times the odds of a LOS > 1 day and 0.67 (0.54-0.83) times the odds of developing urinary tract infections. Nevertheless, no difference was found for other postoperative complications, need for transfusion, and return to OR.

CONCLUSION

Real-life data from a large national database confirmed that LEP is a safe and reproducible procedure to treat benign prostatic obstruction. Compared to TURP, LEP was associated with a lower rate of infectious complications and a shorter LOS at the expense of an increased operative time.

Approach to and management of abnormalities in plasma sodium

The differential diagnosis between hypertonic, isotonic and hypotonic hyponatremia are presented. The help of some usual serum (urea, uric acid and TCO₂) and urine parameters (mainly osmolality and sodium concentration) are discussed and help to determine the best treatment. Morbidity associated with untreated hyponatremia and with the different treatment available is also discussed. Who to prevent and treat ODS (osmotic demyelating syndrome) is recalled. The pathophysiology and treatment of hypernatremia are also discussed.