Back to Search
Start Over
Evaluating transurethral resection of the prostate over twenty years: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
- Source :
-
World journal of urology [World J Urol] 2024 Nov 15; Vol. 42 (1), pp. 639. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Nov 15. - Publication Year :
- 2024
-
Abstract
- Purpose: The goal of this systematic review is to assess the temporal changes in outcomes and complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) from 2000 to 2022.<br />Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 103 randomized clinical trials from PubMed on TURP, involving 8521 patients. Studies were grouped by years: 2000-2004, 2005-2009, 2010-2014, and 2015-2022. We assessed International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Peak Flow (Qmax), Post-void residue of urine (PVR), and post-operative complications. Heterogeneity was ranked as low (I <superscript>2</superscript> < 25%), moderate (I <superscript>2</superscript> = 25-75%), or high (I <superscript>2</superscript> > 75%).<br />Results: TURP significantly improved IPSS, Qmax, and PVR, with the most recent studies showing superior results in IPSS and Qmax after 3 years compared to 2000-2004 studies. Heterogeneity in PVR was high (I <superscript>2</superscript> = 100%). No negative impact on erectile function was observed. Complication rates included TURP syndrome (2%), bleeding (8%), and blood transfusion (6%), but elevated heterogeneity with difference between the groups was seen in clot evacuation (I <superscript>2</superscript> = 83%) and urinary tract infections (I <superscript>2</superscript> = 82%). Other complications were urinary retention (4%), incontinence (8%), urethral stricture (3%), bladder neck stenosis (2%).<br />Conclusion: In the last 20 years there has not been a clear trend in the results of TURP. The found heterogeneity may indicate a lack of standardization in TURP procedures. However, symptomatic improvement among patients is uniform, which supports this procedure as a historical benchmark surgical treatment for BPH.<br />Competing Interests: Declarations Conflict of interests The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics approval This is a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis with public data. The University of Miami Institutional Review Board has confirmed that no ethical approval is required. Consent to publish Not required.<br /> (© 2024. The Author(s).)
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1433-8726
- Volume :
- 42
- Issue :
- 1
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- World journal of urology
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 39547977
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-024-05332-3