Thirty-eight high-risk surgical patients with urinary retention due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were treated by placement of a prostatic spiral under local anesthesia (group 1: 20 patients) or a prostatic stent under intravenous sedation (group 2: 18 patients). At the 1-year follow-up, mean peak flow rate, residual urine volume and subjective symptoms scale were significantly better in the stent group (p < 0.01). The rate of postoperative urinary incontinence and dislocation of the device was greater in the spiral group. Cystoscopic manipulation and removal of the device were definitely easier with the spiral. Both the prostatic spiral and stent have specific roles in the treatment of urinary retention in the unfit BPH patient. The selection of the most suitable device depends on accurate patient assessment.
PROSTATIC SPIRAL VERSUS PROSTATIC UROLUME WALLSTENT FOR URINARY RETENTION DUE TO BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA - A LONG-TERM COMPARATIVE-STUDY
MONTORSI , FRANCESCO;
1993-01-01
Abstract
Thirty-eight high-risk surgical patients with urinary retention due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were treated by placement of a prostatic spiral under local anesthesia (group 1: 20 patients) or a prostatic stent under intravenous sedation (group 2: 18 patients). At the 1-year follow-up, mean peak flow rate, residual urine volume and subjective symptoms scale were significantly better in the stent group (p < 0.01). The rate of postoperative urinary incontinence and dislocation of the device was greater in the spiral group. Cystoscopic manipulation and removal of the device were definitely easier with the spiral. Both the prostatic spiral and stent have specific roles in the treatment of urinary retention in the unfit BPH patient. The selection of the most suitable device depends on accurate patient assessment.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
