经直肠高能聚焦超声与经尿道前列腺切除术治疗前列腺增生症近期疗效比较

A comparative study and evaluations on the results of TURP and transrectal high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia

目的研究经尿道前列腺切除术(TURP)与经直肠高强度聚焦超声系统(HIFU)治疗前列腺增生症(BPH)的临床疗效。方法对80例BPH手术患者随机分为2组,每组40例,分别行TURP、HIFU前列腺消融术治疗,回顾分析并比较各组术后一般情况及并发症等。复查IPSS、QOLS、PV、Qmas、RUV等疗效指标,对所测指标进行统计学分析。结果两组病人术前一般情况比较差别无显著性(P>0.05)。HIFU组在术后相关指标及并发症发生率与TURP组有显著差异(P<0.05),HIFU组的并发症发生率明显低于TURP组。各组术后主、客观症状均较术前明显改善,比较有显著性差异(P<0.05)。HIFU组在术后3个月主、客观指标比较中与TURP组有显著差异(P<0.05),但在术后1年时HIFU组、TURP组各主、客观指标比较差别无显著性(P>0.05)。结论HIFU前列腺消融术与TURP近期疗效相当,但它在治疗BPH患者中,较TURP更安全,更具微创,术中无出血,手术时间、住院时间短,并发症少等优点。

Objective To study and compare the effectiveness of TURP, HIFU for the treatment of Benign Prostatic hyperplasia. Methods 80 cases of BPH were treated with TURP （n=40） and HIFU（n=40）. The therapeutic effects and complication were evaluated. Results There was no significant difference of pretherapy factors between the two groups （P〉0.05）. IPSS, QOLS, PV, Qmas, RUV are significantly improved in each group after the procedure （P〈0.05）. The amount of bleeding, TURS occurring, the mean bladder irrigating time, resident time etcl in HIFU group were less or shorter than that in TURP group. 12 months postoperatively, there was no obviously difference in each group in IPSS, QOLS, PV, Qmas, RUV after the procedure （P〈0.05）. Conclusion The means of transrectal high intensity focused ultrasound for treatment of BPH is more safer than TURP.