|
| 经尿道前列腺钬激光剜除术与电切术对勃起功能的影响及效果评估 |
| Assessment ofeffect of holmium laser enucleation and transurethral plasmakinetic resectionof prostate on erectile function |
| 投稿时间：2022-04-21 |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1000-0399.2022.10.008 |
| 中文关键词: 前列腺剜除术 钬激光 勃起功能 |
| 英文关键词: Enucleation of prostate Holmium laser Erectile function |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 883 |
| 全文下载次数: 1403 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 探讨经尿道前列腺钬激光剜除术和等离子电切术对前列腺增生患者勃起功能的影响及术后的临床效果。方法 选择2018年10月至2020年12月在安徽省第二人民医院泌尿外科行前列腺增生手术的患者84例。根据手术方式不同分成两组,其中经尿道前列腺钬激光剜除(HoLEP)组42例,经尿道前列腺等离子电切(TUPKP)组42例。采用国际勃起功能指数(IIEF-5)评估两组患者术前、术后6个月勃起功能。记录并比较两组患者手术前后最大尿流率(Qmax)、生活质量评分(QoL)、前列腺症状评分(IPSS),评估手术疗效。结果 两组患者术后IIEF-5评分较术前比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组患者比较,HoLEP组术后评分升高(0.7±0.2)分,TUPKP组术后评分降低(0.4±0.1)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后两组患者在Qmax、QoL、IPSS方面,较术前明显改善,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后HoLEP组在拔除导尿管时间及术后住院时间上较TUPKP组明显缩短,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 两种手术方式均能改善前列腺增生引起的排尿症状,但HoLEP组在术后勃起功能的保护,术后尽快恢复出院等方面更具优势。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To compare the effect of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HPLEP) and transurethral plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (TUPKP) on patients and evaluate their impacts on erectile function.Methods A total of 84 patients who underwent surgery for prostatic hyperplasia in the department of urology in Anhui No.2 Provincical People’s Hospital from October 2018 to December 2020 were selected and divided into two groups according to different surgical methods, including 42 cases in the HoLEP group and 42 cases in the TUPKP group.The preoperative and postoperative data were comparatively analyzed between the two groups. Erectile function was estimated by the International index of erectile function (IIEF-5). The postoperative effects were appraised by maximum urinary flow rate(Qmax), quality of life(QoL)score and international prostate symptom score (IPSS).Results There was no significant difference between the two groups in postoperative IIEF-5.However, mean IIEF-5 score increased in HoLEP group (0.7±0.2) and decreased in TUPKP group (0.4±0.1).The difference between the two groups was statistically significant. After the operation, IPSS, QOL and Qmax of the two groups were significantly improved than those before operation.There was no significant difference in IPSS, QoL and Qmax between the two group safter operation.The HoLEP group was superior to TUPKP group in terms of bladder irrigation time, indwelling time of catheter and postoperative hospitalization time. Conclusions Both methods could effectively improve the urinary symptoms caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia, but HoLEP had more advantages in the protection of sexual function and postoperative recovery. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|
