TURP和SPP在前列腺增生的疗效比较

Efficacy comparison of TURP and SPP in patients with BPH

目的探讨前列腺增生（BPH）手术治疗中经尿道前列腺电切术（TURP）和耻骨上经膀胱前列腺切除术（SPP）各自的临床疗效。方法分析2005年8月至2013年7月108例BPH患者的临床资料，将其随机分成TURP组和sPP组，每组54例。比较两组患者的一般资料以及手术前后各项观察指标值。结果两组症状、年龄、国际前列腺症状评分（IPSS）评分、剩余尿量、生活质量指数（QOL）评分以及最大尿流率、前列腺分度等比较差异均未见统计学意义（P〉0．05）。两组手术时间、住院时间、留置尿管及手术后的膀胱冲洗时间、术中出血量比较差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。两组手术前后QOL评分、IPSS评分、剩余尿量以及最大尿流率间比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。结论SPP术整体效果不及TURP术，但是在大量技术设备缺乏、经济欠发达的地区，传统术式SPP仍然是BPH患者治疗的有利手段。

Objective To analyze the clinical efficacy of transurethrue resection of prostate （TURP） amd suprapubic transvesical prostateetomy （SPP） on benign prostatic hyperplasia （BPH）. Methods The clinical data of 108 patients with BPH from April 2012 to June 2015 was retrospectively analyzed. All the patients were randomly divided into TURP group and SPP group, with 54 cases in each group. The general information and observation indexes before and after operation were compared between the two groups. Results The symptoms, age, IPSS score, residual urine volume, QOL score, maximum urinary flow rate, prostate index and so on of patients between the two groups had no significant difference （P 〉 0. 05）. The operation time, hospitalization time, the time of indwelling urinary catheter, the time of bladder washing after operation, intraoperative blood loss of patients between the two groups had significant difference （P 〈 0. 05）. The QOL score, IPSS score, residual urine volume, maximum urinary flow rate before and after operation between the two groups had significant difference （P 〈 0. 05 ）. Conclusions The clinical effect of TURP on SPP. But SPP is still an BPH is better than important mean for treating BPH in the region of technology and equipment not available, less developed economy.