What question did this study set out to answer?

The study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of TUVP and TURP in treating infravesical obstruction caused by BPH.

April 24, 2026The Prostate0 citations

View Full Paper

Safety and Efficacy of Bipolar Transurethral Vaporization of the Prostate and Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in the Management of Large Volume Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Prospective Randomized Study

ALAmr M. Lotfy MKMaged Mostafa KamelBeni-Suef University MAMahmoud Abdallah

Key Points

The study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of TUVP and TURP in treating infravesical obstruction caused by BPH.
Conducted as a randomized controlled trial with 72 patients aged over 50 years.
Patients were divided into two groups: 36 underwent bipolar TUVP and 36 underwent bipolar TURP.
Surgical outcomes, including operative time, blood loss, and urinary symptom scores, were measured postoperatively.
TUVP showed shorter operative times (70.28 min vs. 87.08 min) and less blood loss (Hb drop 0.37 g/dl vs. 1.51 g/dl).
Postoperative recovery was faster for TUVP with shorter catheterization and hospital stay (1.19 vs. 2.28 days).
At follow-up, while symptoms improved similarly for both, TURP had a higher incidence of retrograde ejaculation (72.2% vs. 41.7%).

Abstract

ABSTRACT Purpose The aim of the study was to compare the functional and sexual outcomes of bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate (TUVP) and bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients with infravesical obstruction due to BPH. Methods This is a randomized controlled study conducted in Urology Department of Beni‐Suef University hospital on 72 patients aged above 50 years with infravesical obstruction and indicated for intervention, patients were divided into 2 Groups, Group A 36 patients operated on by bipolar TUVP and Group B 36 patients operated on by bipolar TURP. Result The TUVP group exhibited superior intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, including shorter operative time (70.28 vs. 87.08 min, p < 0.001), less blood loss (Hb drop 0.37 vs. 1.51 g/dl, p < 0.001), and reduced catheterization/hospital stay (1.19 vs. 2.28 days, p < 0.001) compared to TURP while comparable results in modified Clavien classification of complications. At 1‐month follow‐up, both procedures showed similar improvements in international prostatic symptom score (IPSS), flow rates (Qmax), and residual urine volume, though retrograde ejaculation was more frequent with TURP (72.2% vs. 41.7%, p < 0.001). By 3–12 months, IPSS and Qmax remained comparable, with no significant differences in erectile function (IIEF). However, TURP showed clinically relevant (though non‐significant) advantages in long‐term symptom control (IPSS 4.03 vs. 4.92). and urinary flow, suggesting potentially greater durability than TUVP. Conclusion Bipolar TUVP demonstrates notable advantages in early postoperative recovery, including shorter operative times, reduced blood loss, and faster convalescence, positioning it as a minimally invasive alternative for eligible patient. However, TURP may offer superior long‐term symptom relief and urinary flow rates despite carrying a higher risk of retrograde ejaculation.

اسأل الذكاء الاصطناعي

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Lotfy et al. (Wed,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69eb0961553a5433e34b3ed6 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/pros.70188

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

اسأل الذكاء الاصطناعي

Bookmark

View Full Paper