Premium
A double‐blind randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of transurethral resection vs contact laser vaporization for benign prostatic enlargement: a 3‐year follow‐up
Author(s) -
Keoghane S.R.,
Lawrence K.C.,
Gray A.M.,
Doll H.A.,
Hancock A.M.,
Turner K.,
Sullivan M.E.,
Dyar O.,
Cranston D.
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
bju international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.773
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1464-410X
pISSN - 1464-4096
DOI - 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2000.00407.x
Subject(s) - medicine , perioperative , prostatectomy , urology , randomized controlled trial , laser surgery , prostate , open prostatectomy , transurethral resection of the prostate , hyperplasia , surgery , laser , cancer , physics , optics
Objective To evaluate the effect of contact laser prostate surgery in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Patients and methods A prospective double‐blind ran‐domized controlled trial of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and contact laser prostatectomy was conducted, with an economic evaluation of both procedures. The primary outcome measure was the change in the American Urologic Association symptom score, with secondary outcome measures being the peak urinary flow rate, treatment‐related complications, re‐operation rate and health service costs. Results The perioperative blood loss and transfusion requirements were statistically significantly lower for laser prostatectomy than for TURP. There was no clinically significant difference between TURP and contact laser prostatectomy in the mean change in symptom scores and flow rates. There were distinct perioperative advantages in favour of the contact laser treatment, but some disadvantages in terms of re‐catheterization and re‐operation rates. Conclusions Contact laser prostatectomy is a valid treatment for benign prostatic hypertrophy. The performance of contact laser prostatectomy as day‐case surgery would have cost advantages to the National Health Service.