Medium-term Clinical Efficacy and Complications of Plasmakinetic Enucleation of the Prostate Versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Objective To compare surgical characteristics, clinical efficacy, and complications of plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Materials and Methods From January 2015 to May 2018, 370 patients underwent TURP were included into the TURP group. Meanwhile, another 370 patients underwent PKEP (matched by age, prostate volume, and duration of BPH) were included into the PKEP group. Then, the differences of surgical characteristics, clinical efficacy, and complications were compared between the two groups. Results The operative time, intraoperative irrigation volume, postoperative irrigation time and irrigation volume, drop in hemoglobin, blood transfusion, postoperative catheterization time, and hospital stay of the PKEP group were significantly less than those of the TURP group (P <.05). No significant differences were observed in the resected tissue weight, visual analogue scale score, and total cost of hospitalization (P >.05); The quality of life score of the PKEP group was significantly lower than that of the TURP group (P <.05). No significant differences of maximum flow rate, postvoid residual urine, Serum prostate-specific antigen, international prostate symptom score and International Index of Erectile Function score were observed (P >.05); The incidences of urinary tract irritation, massive hemorrhage, secondary hemorrhage, bladder spasm, clot retention, and retrograde ejaculation of the PKEP group were significantly lower than those of the TURP group (P <.05). Conclusion PKEP and TURP are comparable regarding cost burden and clinical efficacy in medium-term follow-up. However, PKEP should be given a priority for BPH treatment because of less complication rate and better safety profile.