S W V Coppinger | PubMed Health

PubMed2006

A prospective, randomized trial comparing conventional transurethral prostate resection with PlasmaKinetic vaporization of the prostate: physiological changes, early complications and long-term followup.

PURPOSE: We compared standard transurethral prostate resection with bipolar PlasmaKinetic prostate vaporization for bladder outflow obstruction using a Gyrus PlasmaKinetic Plasma V bar. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 160 men were enrolled in a prospective, randomized trial. Those at higher risk for cancer were excluded by prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination with or without transrectal ultrasound biopsy. A total of 81 men underwent prostate vaporization and 79 underwent transurethral prostate resection. Preoperative International Prostate Symptom Score and quality of life score, uroflowmetry, post-void residual urine and transrectal ultrasound prostate volume were recorded. Preoperative and postoperative serum hemoglobin, hematocrit and sodium were measured. Perioperative fluid absorption was calculated using weighing on table and blood loss using the Hemocue system. Longer followup of International Prostate Symptom Score and quality of life score, uroflowmetry and post-void residual urine was available in 149 men, including 76 who underwent prostate vaporization and 73 who underwent transurethral prostate resection. Data were analyzed using the 1 or 2-sample t and chi-square tests. RESULTS: The 2 groups were comparable in all preoperative parameters. Perioperative fluid absorption, intraoperative blood loss, preoperative and postoperative serum hematocrit, and sodium changes were not statistically different. Mean resection time was 4 minutes shorter for transurethral prostate resection (28.5 vs 32.6 minutes, p = 0.08). Patients with transurethral prostate resection showed a greater hemoglobin decrease (1.39 vs 0.8 gm/dl, p = 0.002) and required more irrigation postoperatively (28.3 vs 20.4 l, p = 0.001). Four patients with transurethral prostate resection required transfusion compared with none who underwent prostate vaporization. After transurethral prostate resection hospital stay was longer (3.36 vs 3.02 days, p = 0.03). Cancer was detected in 8 patients with transurethral prostate resection (10%), of whom 7 are under prostate specific antigen surveillance and 1 received radical radiotherapy. Mean long-term followup was 258 days (range 82 to 884). Prostate vaporization and transurethral prostate resection were equally effective at followup, as evidenced by changes in maximum urine flow, International Prostate Symptom Score, quality of life score and post-void residual urine. CONCLUSIONS: The 2 operations are highly effective in experienced hands. PlasmaKinetic prostate vaporization resulted in less postoperative bleeding and a slightly shorter hospital stay. The lack of a histological specimen with this version of PlasmaKinetic prostate vaporization may mean that clinically significant cancers are missed.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Validation of the ethanol breath test and on-table weighing to measure irrigating fluid absorption during transurethral prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the agreement between on-table weighing and the ethanol breath test in measuring the fluid absorption of patients during transurethral prostatectomy (TURP), and to assess the practicality of on-table weighing in the clinical setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The absorption of irrigating fluid by the patient during TURP can lead to adverse sequelae, including cardiac stress. Despite modern techniques irrigant may still be absorbed and therefore methods to detect absorption are important. Most methods are impractical or inaccurate, but the expired ethanol technique and continuous on-table weighing are more promising. TURP was undertaken in 44 men (mean age 71 years) using continuous flow 1.5% glycine/1% ethanol as the irrigating solution. Intraoperative irrigant absorption was calculated by the ethanol breath test, using published formulae. Absorption measured by the weighing machine was calculated as (weight gain + blood loss - fluid given), and blood loss by the Hemocue method. RESULTS: The mean (sd) resected weight was 23 (14) g at a mean resection rate of 0.74 g/min. The mean (range) absorption using the balance was 456 (- 343 to 2486) mL, and using the ethanol breath test was 435 (44-2750) mL, with the mean of the differences being - 17 mL, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of - 81 to -40, the 95% limits of agreement being - 389 to 356 mL (95% CI - 458 to - 337 and 297 to 418 mL). CONCLUSIONS: Both methods are comparable and measure irrigating fluid absorption to levels of accuracy that are useful clinically. Either method could (and should) be used in routine practice.

Absorption↗