【摘要】 目的对比研究经尿道前列腺汽化电切除术(transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate,TUVP)联合经尿道前列腺电切术(transurethral resection of the prostate,TURP)与开放性前列腺切除术治疗良性前列腺增生症(ben ign prostatehyperp lasia,BPH)的围术期情况。方法我院1997年11月~2004年12月手术治疗BPH 156例,其中TUVP联合TURP 53例,耻骨上前列腺切除术103例。结果2组手术时间无显著性差异(90±70 m in vs 108±68 m in,t=-1.550,P=0.123),TUVP联合TURP组输血率(8%vs 38%,2χ=16.109,P=0.000),尿液转清时间(2±1 d vs 4±1 d,t=-11.831,P=0.000),术后带尿管时间(10±8 d vs 19±10 d,t=-5.680,P=0.000),术后下床活动时间(6±4 d vs 20±10 d,t=-9.785,P=0.000),术后住院时间(20±14 d vs 34±24 d,t=-3.914,P=0.000)均优于开放组,但并发症发生率高(15.1%vs 2.9%,2χ=6.173,P=0.013)。结论TUVP联合TURP治疗BPH创伤小,术后恢复快,是一种良好的手术方式。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate peri-operative clinical effects of transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate(TUVP) combined with transurethral resection of the prostate(TURP) versus open prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia(BPH).Methods A total of 156 cases of BPH were surgically treated in this hospital from November 1997 to December 2004,including 53 cases of TUVP combined with TURP(Combination Group) and 103 cases of open suprapublic prostatectomy(Open Group). Results There were no significant differences in the operation time between the two groups(90±70 min vs 108±68 min;t=(-1.550),P=0.123).The Combination Group was superior to the Open Group in the blood transfusion rate(8% vs 38%;χ~2=16.109,P=0.000),the time to clear urine(2±1 d vs 4±1 d;t=-11.831,P=0.000),the postoperative catheterization time(10±8 d vs 19±10 d;t=-5.680,P=0.000),the time to get out of bed(6±4 d vs 20±10 d;t=-9.785,P=0.000),and the postoperative hospital stay(20±14 d vs 34±24 d;t=-3.914,P=0.000).The incidence of complications was higher in the Combination Group than in the Open Group(15.1% vs 2.9%;χ~2=6.173,P=0.013).Conclusions TUVP in combination with TURP for benign prostate hyperplasia has advantages of little invasion and rapid recovery.更多还原