title: Is transurethral vaporesection of the prostate better than standard transurethral resection?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to undertake an evaluation of the comparative efficacy and morbidity of transurethral vaporesection (TUVRP) and standard transurethral resection (TURP), two resection techniques using loops of different thickness and power settings.
  
  
  METHODS
  In a prospective study, 185 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of bladder outlet obstruction and benign prostatic enlargement were randomized to undergo either TUVRP or standard TURP. Inclusion criteria were benign prostatic enlargement, moderate or severe lower urinary tract symptoms and/or a significant urinary residual (>60 ml), while patients with previous prostatic surgery, prostate cancer or neurogenic bladder disorders were excluded. Prostate size, residual urine, urinary flow rate and symptoms as well as associated bother (using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the American Urological Association Bother Score (AUA-BS)) were assessed preoperatively. Intraoperative blood loss and fluid absorption were evaluated by measuring serum hemoglobin and respiratory alcohol concentration. Patients were followed for 1 year with the evaluation of flow rates, residual urine volumes, symptom scores and complications at 3, 6 and 12 months.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A significant difference was seen in the weight of the resected tissue (TURP 30.3 g vs. TUVRP 21.9 g, p<0.003). There were no significant differences in blood loss, intraoperative fluid absorption or procedure time between TUVRP and TURP, although more patients in the TURP group required blood transfusions (13 vs. 7) and mean procedure time was longer for TUVRP (71.0 vs. 65.9 min). The postoperative improvements in IPSS, AUA-BS, residual and Q(max) were significant in both groups (p<0.01 for each) but without difference between the two groups. The rate of complications (urinary tract infections, urethral stricture, reintervention rate) during follow-up was the same in both groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In this prospective randomized comparison of the clinical outcome and morbidity of standard TURP versus TUVRP, there were no significant differences in any of the parameters evaluated except for the weight of the resected tissue.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University, Dresden, Germany.
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Helke
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Manseck
authors.forename: O W
authors.initials: OW
authors.lastname: Hakenberg
authors.forename: M P
authors.initials: MP
authors.lastname: Wirth
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D004598:Electrosurgery / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011470:Prostatic Hyperplasia / Q000601:surgery*; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D020728:Transurethral Resection of Prostate / Q000379:methods*; D014555:Urination Disorders / Q000601:surgery*