OUTCOME COMPARISON OF TRANSURETHRAL RESECTION PROSTATE IN BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA PATIENT IN KARAWANG GENERAL REFERRAL HOSPITAL

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

PDF
Published 2020-01-22
Ramlan Halimi Achmad Rizky Herda Pratama

Abstract

Objective: Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) is the most common pathological condition in man and causes Lower Urinary Tract Syndrome (LUTS). The most popular therapeutic modality for BPH is the Transurethral Resection of Prostate (TURP). This study describes the TURP outcome in BPH patients with prostate volume >75 grams compared to <75 grams Karawang General Referral Hospital. Material & Methods: We performed a retrospective review of clinical outcome from BPH patient with LUTS who underwent TURP procedure between January 2017–April 2018. Data is taken through patient medical records and processed descriptively to describe complications, quality of life, laboratory. Qualitative data compared with Chi-Square test. Results: During this study, we evaluate 40 patients, 20 patients with prostate volume >75 grams (Group 1) and 20 patients prostate volume <75 grams. Mean age in group 1 65,60 ± 9.960 and in group 2 65,35 ± 10,297. IPSS after TURP between group 1 and group 2 show a significant difference, where the Incomplete Emptying found most in group 2 (P<0,05). There is no significant difference Quality of Life Score between group 1 and group 2 (P>0,05). From laboratory result obtain decrease of mean Haemoglobin percentage in both groups with P value <0,05 in group 1 and P value <0,05 in group 2. Conclusion: TURP procedure for patient with prostate volume >75 grams is safety and effective with lower complications and there is no significant difference compared to patient with prostate volume <75 grams.


##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, TURP, volume

References

HN Joshi, IJ de Jong, RM Karmacharya, B Shrestha, R Shrestha. Outcomes of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Comparing Prostate Size of more than 80 Grams to Prostate Size less than 80 Grams. Kathmandu University medical journal. 2014; 12: 163-7.

Roehrborn CG. Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Etiology, Pathophysiology, Epidemiology, and Natural History. Campbell-Walsh Urology 11th. 2016: 2425-662.

Al-Hammouri F, Abu-Qamar A. Monopolar Transurethral resection of the big prostate, experience at Prince Hussein Bin Abdullah Urology Center. J Pak Med Assoc. 2011; 61: 628-31.

Kallenberg F, Hossack TA, Woo HH. Long-Term Follow-up after Electrocautery Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Hindawi Publishing Corporation Advances in Urology. 2011; 20; 1-6.

Palaniappan S, Kuo TL, Cheng CW, Foo KT. Early outcome of transurethral enucleation and resection of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate. Singapore Med J. 2016; 57(12): 676-680.

Madduri VK, Bera MK, Pal DK. Monopolar versus bipolar transurethral resection of prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: Operative outcomes and surgeon preferences, a real-world scenario. Urology Annals. 2016; 8: 291-96.

Mochtar CA, Umbas R, Soebadi DM, Rasyid N, Noegroho BS, Poernomo BB et al. Panduan penatalaksanaan klinis pembesaran prostat jinak. Ikatan Ahli Urologi Indonesia (IAUI). 2015; 2: 1-27.

Tang J, Yang J. Etiopathogenesis of benign prostatic Hyperplasia. Ind J Urol 2009; 25: 312-7.

Abrams P, Chpple C, Khoury S, Roehrborn C, de La Rosette J. International Scientific committee. Evaluation and treatment of Lower urinary tract symptoms in older men. J Urol. 2009; 81: 1779-873 .

Djavan B, Nickel JC, De La Rosette J, Abrams P. The Urologist view of BPH progression: results of an international survey. Eur Urol. 2002;41: 490-6.

Berry SJ, Coffey DS, Walsh PC, Ewing LL. The development of human benign prostatic hyperplasia with age. J Urol. 1984; 132: 474-9.

Yucel M, Aras B, Yalcinkaya S, Hatipoglu NK, Aras E. Conventional monopolar transurethral resection of prostate in patients with large prostate (>/-80 grams). Cent European J Urol. 2013; 66(3): 303-308.

Elssayed EO, Mansour MI, Eliman M. Clincal appraisal of TURP in Gezira Hospital for renal diseases and surgery. Global Journal of medical research surgeries and cardiovascular system. 2013; 13: 13-7.

Olumi AF, Richie JP. Urologic Surgery. In: Townsend CR, Beauchamp RD, Evers BM, Mattox KL (editors). Sabiston Textbook of Surgery, 18th ed. Sunders Elsevier (publisher); 2008. pp. 2251-2285.

Madersbacher S, Marberg M. Is the transurethral resection of prostate still justified? BJU Int. 1999; 83: 227-37.

Madersbacher S, Lackner J, Brossner C, Rochlich M, Stancik I, Willinger M, et al. Prostate Study Group of the Austrian Society of Urology. Reoperation, myocardial Infarction and mortality after transurethral and open prostatectomy: a nation-wide, long-term analysis of 23,123 cases. Eur Urol 2005; 47: 499-504.

Mebust WK, Roizo R, Schroeder F, Villers A. Correlations between pathology, clinical symptoms and course of the disease. The international Consultation on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia- Proceedings. Paris; 1991. pp 51-62.

May F, Hartung R. Transurethral resection of the prostate. Atlas urology. 2006 : 921-34.

Fitzpatrick JM. Millin retropubic prostatectomy. Advanced urologic surgery. 2005 : 139-41.

Kirby RS. Progressive development of benign prostatic hyperplasia. An atlas prostatic deseases 3rd edition. 2003: 58-62.

Hinman F, Stempen PH. Anatomy and principles of excision of the prostate. Atlas of urology surgery 2nd edition. 2010: 412-64.

Stern JA, Fitzpatrick JM, McVary KT. Prostate anatomy and causative theories pathophysiology and natural history of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Management of benign prostatic hypertrophy. 2004: 1-19.

Donahue TF, Costa JA. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate. Management of benign prostatic hypertrophy. 2004: 97-108.

Foster HE, Jacobs M. Transurethral resection of the prostate. Management of benign prostatic hypertrophy. 2004: 163-93.

Kozlowski JM, Smith ND, Grayhack JT. Suprapubic transvesical prostatectomy and simple perineal prostatectomy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Management of benign prostatic hypertrophy. 2004: 221-62.

Connolly SS, Fitzpatrick JM. Complication of open prostate surgery. Complications in urologic surgery and practice. 2007: 129-35.

Helfand BT, McVary KT. Complication of minimally invasive treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Complications in urologic surgery and practice. 2007: 393-423.

Kursh ED. Evaluation and treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Essential urology 1st edition. 2004; 191-202.

Jacobsen SJ, Girman CJ, Lieber MM. Natural history of benign prostatic hyperplasia. The prostate new concepts and development. 2004: 1-21.

Hegarty P, Fitzpatrick JM, Bruskewitz. Medical management – watchful waiting. Therapeuitic treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia. 2005: 1-9.

Ceylan K, open prostatectomy the result of a series of 320 cases in rural area. Eur J Gen Med 2006; 3(1):11-15.

Section
Articles
Copyright Information
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine/Airlangga University