【摘要】 目的比较和评价TURP加经尿道膀胱颈切开(TUIBN)与TURP加经尿道膀胱颈电切术(TURBN)治疗小体积前列腺增生的疗效。方法总结经尿道手术治疗小体积前列腺增生27例的临床资料,12例行TURP加经尿道膀胱颈切开,15例行TURP加经尿道膀胱颈电切术,比较研究两组病例术前、术后国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、最大尿流率(Qmax)、残余尿量(PVR),以评估疗效。结果TURP+TUIBN组:术前、术后IPSS评分分别为:(24.3±3.8)分、(7.2±3.6)分;Qmax:(8.5±3.6)mL/s、(17.4±4.2)mL/s;PVR:(102.0±20.0)mL、(19.0±4.0)mL。TURP+TURBN组:术前、术后IPSS评分分别为:(23.6±5.7)分、(6.9±3.0)分;Qmax:(8.2±3.1)mL/s、(23.1±3.1)mL/s;PVR:(96.0±37.0)mL、(9.0±5.0)mL。术前IPSS、Qmax、PVR两组间差异无显著性(P>0.05),术后两组间IPSS评分差异无显著性(P>0.05),而Qmax、PVR两组间差异有显著性(P<0.01)。结论TURP+TURBN治疗小体积前列腺增生的临床疗效比TURP+TUIBN更理想。更多还原

【Abstract】 [Objective] To compare and evaluate the efficacy of TURP plus TUIBN and TURP plus TURBN in treatment of small-size prostate hyperplasia. [Methods] The clinical data of 27 cases of small-size BPH treated by transurethral surgery were reviewed and analyzed. Of the total number, 12 underwent transurethral prostate resection (TURP) plus transurethral incision of the bladder neck (TUIBN) and 15 TURP plus transurethral resection of the bladder neck (TURBN). The curative effect of the two different surgical methods was evaluated by international prostate symptom score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax) and post-voiding residual urine volume (PVR). [Results] In the TURP+TUIBN group, the IPSS before the operation and after it was (24.3±3.8) and (7.2±3.6) respectively, the Qmax was (8.5±3.6) mL/s and (17.4±4.2) mL/s, the PVR (102.0±20.0) mL and (19.0±4.0) mL. In the TURP+TURBN groups, the IPSS before the operation and after it was (23.6±5.7) and (6.9±3.0) respectively, the Qmax was (8.2±3.1) mL/s and (23.1±3.1) mL/s, the PVR (96.0±37.0) mL and (9.0±5.0) mL. No statistical difference (P >0.05) was found in IPSS, Qmax and PVR between the two groups before the operation, there was still no statistical difference in IPSS after it, but significant difference (P <0.01) was observed in Qmax and PVR. [Conclusion] TURP+TURBN was a better treatment for small-size BPH than TURP+TUIBN.更多还原