Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Jan:87:161-5.
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.038.

Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate vs Plasmakinetic Resection of the Prostate: A Randomized Prospective Trial With 12-Month Follow-up in Mainland China

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate vs Plasmakinetic Resection of the Prostate: A Randomized Prospective Trial With 12-Month Follow-up in Mainland China

Mou Peng et al. Urology. 2016 Jan.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the short-term efficacy and safety results of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) and plasmakinetic resection of prostate (PKRP), 2 methods of treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-related lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in mainland China.

Methods: One hundred twenty patients with LUTS secondary to BPH were randomly divided into 2 groups: PVP group (n = 61) and PKRP group (n = 59). Perioperative data and postoperative complications were recorded for both groups. Patients were followed up for 12 months after treatment.

Results: Compared with PKRP, PVP required a longer operation time (56 vs 41 minutes; P <.01). PVP also needed shorter catheterization time (2.4 vs 3.5 days; P <.01) and shorter length of hospitalization (3.5 vs 5.1 days; P <.01). International Prostate Symptom Score, Qmax, and quality of life score were significantly improved for both groups after surgery, and no significant differences were apparent between the 2 groups, for up to 12 months. Short-term complications were assessed in regard to necessity of blood transfusion (1 vs 1), clot retention (1 vs 0), reoperation (1 vs 0), incontinence (0 vs 0), urethral stricture (1 vs 0), and retrograde ejaculation (4 vs 6) in the PVP vs PKRP groups, respectively.

Conclusion: In patients with BPH-related LUTS, PVP may be a superior treatment to PKRP as it relates to the endpoints of this study, with short-term results after a 12-month follow-up as length of hospital stay and catheterization time needed were both less than what was required for PKRP. Long-term comparative data are required to clearly define the role of PVP and PKRP in patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources