Reoperation after surgical treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review

被引:7
|
作者
He, Weixiang [1 ]
Ding, Ting [2 ]
Niu, Zhiping [3 ]
Hao, Chunlin [1 ]
Li, Chengbin [1 ]
Xu, Zhicheng [1 ]
Jing, Yuming [1 ]
Qin, Weijun [1 ]
机构
[1] Fourth Mil Med Univ, Xijing Hosp, Dept Urol, Xian, Peoples R China
[2] Fourth Mil Med Univ, Xijing Hosp, Dept Clin Lab Med, Xian, Shaanxi, Peoples R China
[3] Fudan Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Environm Hlth, Shanghai, Peoples R China
来源
FRONTIERS IN ENDOCRINOLOGY | 2023年 / 14卷
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
benign prostate hyperplasia; lower urinary tract symptoms; surgery; retreatment; reoperation; HOLMIUM LASER ENUCLEATION; TERM-FOLLOW-UP; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; STANDARD TRANSURETHRAL RESECTION; TITANYL-PHOSPHATE LASER; URINARY-TRACT SYMPTOMS; PHOTOSELECTIVE VAPORIZATION PROSTATECTOMY; BLADDER OUTLET OBSTRUCTION; TRANSVESICAL PROSTATECTOMY; PLASMAKINETIC ENUCLEATION;
D O I
10.3389/fendo.2023.1287212
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Context Surgical treatment is important for male lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) management, but there are few reviews of the risks of reoperation.Objective To systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding the reoperation rates of surgical treatment for LUTS in accordance with current recommendations and guidelines.Evidence acquisition Eligible studies published up to July 2023, were searched for in the PubMed (R) (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA), Embase (R) (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), and Web of Science (TM) (Clarivate (TM), Philadelphia, PA, USA) databases. STATA (R) (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA) software was used to conduct the meta-analysis. Random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled incidences (PIs) of reoperation and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Evidence synthesis A total of 119 studies with 130,106 patients were included. The reoperation rate of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 4.0%, 5.0%, 6.0%, and 7.7%, respectively. The reoperation rate of plasma kinetic loop resection of the prostate (PKRP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 3.5%, 3.6%, 5.7%, and 6.6%, respectively. The reoperation rate of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 2.4%, 3.3%, 5.4%, and 6.6%, respectively. The reoperation rate of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 3.3%, 4.1%, 6.7%, and 7.1%, respectively. The reoperation rate of surgery with AquaBeam (R) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 2.6%, 3.1%, 3.0%, and 4.1%, respectively. The reoperation rate of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 12.2%, 20.0%, 26.4%, and 23.8%, respectively. The reoperation rate of transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 9.9%, 19.9%, 23.3%, and 31.2%, respectively. The reoperation rate of transurethral incision of the prostate (TUIP) at 5 years was 13.4%. The reoperation rate of open prostatectomy (OP) at 1 and 5 years was 1.3% and 4.4%, respectively. The reoperation rate of thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) at 1, 2, and 5 years was 3.7%, 7.7%, and 8.4%, respectively.Conclusion Our results summarized the reoperation rates of 10 surgical procedures over follow-up durations of 1, 2, 3, and 5 years, which could provide reference for urologists and LUTS patients.Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023445780.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia-resection, vaporization or enucleation?
    Rieken, M.
    Herrmann, T. R. W.
    Fuellhase, C.
    UROLOGE, 2019, 58 (03): : 263 - 270
  • [32] Prostate artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Malling, B.
    Roder, M. A.
    Brasso, K.
    Forman, J.
    Taudorf, M.
    Lonn, L.
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2019, 29 (01) : 287 - 298
  • [33] Medical and Surgical Treatment Modalities for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in the Male Patient Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Review
    Macey, Matthew Ryan
    Raynor, Mathew C.
    SEMINARS IN INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY, 2016, 33 (03) : 217 - 223
  • [34] A Review of Male Sexual Health and Dysfunction Following Surgical Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
    Borchert, Alex
    Leavitt, David A.
    CURRENT UROLOGY REPORTS, 2018, 19 (08)
  • [35] Comparing prostatic artery embolization to surgical and minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Altman, Rachel
    Ferreira, Roseanne
    Barragan, Camilo
    Bhojani, Naeem
    Lajkosz, Katherine
    Zorn, Kevin C.
    Chughtai, Bilal
    Annamalai, Ganesan
    Elterman, Dean S.
    BMC UROLOGY, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [36] Comparing prostatic artery embolization to surgical and minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Rachel Altman
    Roseanne Ferreira
    Camilo Barragan
    Naeem Bhojani
    Katherine Lajkosz
    Kevin C. Zorn
    Bilal Chughtai
    Ganesan Annamalai
    Dean S. Elterman
    BMC Urology, 24
  • [37] Silodosin in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia
    Rossi, Maxime
    Roumeguere, Thierry
    DRUG DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND THERAPY, 2010, 4 : 291 - 297
  • [38] Prostatic artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a review
    Young, Shamar
    Golzarian, Jafar
    CURRENT OPINION IN UROLOGY, 2018, 28 (03) : 284 - 287
  • [39] Trends in the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia in a tertiary hospital
    Ow, Darren
    Papa, Nathan
    Perera, Marlon
    Liodakis, Peter
    Sengupta, Shomik
    Clarke, Stephen
    Bolton, Damien M.
    Lawrentschuk, Nathan
    ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2018, 88 (1-2) : 95 - 99
  • [40] The Role of Prostatic Arterial Embolization in Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review
    Schreuder, S. M.
    Scholtens, A. E.
    Reekers, J. A.
    Bipat, S.
    CARDIOVASCULAR AND INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY, 2014, 37 (05) : 1198 - 1219