Bipolar endoscopic enucleation versus bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate: an ESUT systematic review and cumulative analysis

D Arcaniolo, C Manfredi, A Veccia… - World Journal of …, 2020 - Springer
D Arcaniolo, C Manfredi, A Veccia, TRW Herrmann, E Lima, V Mirone, F Fusco, C Fiori…
World Journal of Urology, 2020Springer
Purpose To perform a cumulative analysis of the current evidence on the surgical and
functional outcomes of bipolar endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (b-EEP) versus
bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (b-TURP). Methods A systematic review of the
literature was performed on PubMed, Ovid®, and Scopus® according to Preferred Reporting
Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Statement (PRISMA Statement). The meta-
analysis was conducted using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Parameters of interest …
Purpose
To perform a cumulative analysis of the current evidence on the surgical and functional outcomes of bipolar endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (b-EEP) versus bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (b-TURP).
Methods
A systematic review of the literature was performed on PubMed, Ovid®, and Scopus® according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Statement (PRISMA Statement). The meta-analysis was conducted using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Parameters of interest were surgical and functional outcomes. Weighted mean difference, and odds ratio with 95% confidence interval were calculated for continuous and binary variables, respectively. Pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effect model.
Results
Fourteen comparative studies were included. No statistically significant difference in terms of overall baseline characteristics was found. b-EEP had higher amount of resected tissue (p < 0.0001), shorter catheter time (p = 0.006), lower Hb drop (p = 0.03), and shorter length of stay (p < 0.0001). Equally, overall post-operative complications were lower (p = 0.01) as well as short (p = 0.04), and long-term complication rate (p = 0.04). There was higher re-intervention rate in the b-TURP group (p = 0.02) whereas b-EEP group had smaller residual prostate volume (p = 0.03), and lower post-operative PSA values (p < 0.00001). At long term, b-EEP presented lower IPSS (p = 0.04), higher Qmax (p = 0.002), and lower PVR (p < 0.00001).
Conclusions
b-EEP is an effective and safe surgical treatment for BPO. This procedure might offer several advantages over standard b-TURP, including the resection of a larger amount of tissue within the same operative time, shorter hospitalization, lower risk of complications, and lower re-intervention rate.
This was submitted to PROSPERO registry: CRD42019126748.
Springer
以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果