Journal Browser Advanced Search Help
Journal Browser Advanced search HELP
World J Mens Health. 2016 Aug;34(2):110-122. English. Meta-Analysis. https://doi.org/10.5534/wjmh.2016.34.2.110
Kang DH , Cho KS , Ham WS , Choi YD , Lee JY .
Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. joouro@yuhs.ac
Department of Urology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (MTURP) and photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in order to provide the most up-to-date and reliable recommendations possible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Relevant RCTs were identified from electronic databases for meta-analysis of the surgical outcomes and complications of MTURP and PVP. Meta-analytical comparisons were made using qualitative and quantitative syntheses. The outcome variables are presented as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: In total, 11 articles were included in this comparative analysis of PVP versus MTURP. Most of the recently published studies exhibited low risk in terms of quality assessment. MTURP was superior to PVP regarding operative time; however, with regard to catheterization and hospitalization time, the mean differences were -1.39 (95% CI=-1.83~-0.95, p<0.001) and -2.21 (95% CI=-2.73~-1.69, p<0.001), respectively, in favor of PVP. PVP was superior to MTURP with regard to transfusion rate and clot retention, but no statistically significant differences were found with regard to acute urinary retention and urinary tract infection. The long-term complications of bladder neck contracture and urethral stricture showed no statistically significant differences between PVP and MTURP. Long-term functional outcomes, including the International Prostate Symptom Score and maximum flow rate, likewise did not display statistically significant differences between PVP and MTURP. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we believe that PVP should be considered as an alternative surgical procedure for treating male lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Copyright © 2019. Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors.