الفهرس 
Aim of the workOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 105 |  |  |
| | | from | 105 | | |
Abstract
This study was performed to compare the safety and efficacy of ThuVaRP with B-TURP in the treatment of BPH.
All Patients were preoperatively evaluated in detail by medical history, physical examination including DRE, laboratory investigations including preoperative serum sodium level, and imaging evaluation including abdomino-pelvic and transrectal ultrasound. IPSS was determined in all cases. Patients were further assessed by uroflowmetry (Qmax). Assessment of IPSS, Qmax, and PVR urine volume were omitted in men presented by urinary retention.
In both groups; resection time and resected volume were analyzed. Blood loss and DROP in Hemoglobin and sodium values were determined. Postoperative catheter time and hospital stay were recorded. Intraoperative and postoperative complications and the need for blood transfusion were noted. The improvements of IPSS, Qmax, and PVR urine after three months were also recorded for all patients.
We found that, the differences were statistically significant regarding to: calculated blood loss during operation with less blood loss during ThuVaRP. Also, the operative time was less in B-TURP and regarding to resected tissue volume, it was more with B-TURP technique.
The mean postoperative catheter time and postoperative hospital stay were significantly less in ThuVaRP group.
Postoperative Hb, Hct and Na+ drops were less in ThuVaRP but with no significant statistical difference.
In both groups, there was no need for blood transfusion neither intraoperatively nor postoperatively. Also, TUR syndrome did not occur in any patient in our study.
As regard the postoperative complications, urine retention and need for reoperation occurred in two cases in the B-TURP (5%) and two cases in the ThuVaRP group (10%).