medigraphic.com
Organo Oficial de la Sociedad Mexicana de Urología

2011, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Urol 2011; 71 (3)

Monopolar and bipolar energy in transurethral resection of the prostate: histopathologically analyzed tissue necrosis

García-Mora A, Villeda-Sandoval CI, Aguilar-Davidov B, Feria-Bernal G, Castillejos-Molina R

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 146-150
PDF size: 371.64 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms is high and increases with age. The principal cause of these symptoms in men is benign prostatic growth. Standing out among the numerous techniques for treating these patients is transurethral resection of the prostate, using either bipolar or monopolar current.
Objective: To analyze whether the type of current and resulting tissue damage had an influence on the final histopathological analysis of the resected tissue.
Methods: Twenty-nine cases of patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate were analyzed. Sixteen of those patients underwent the procedure with monopolar current and thirteen with bipolar current.
Results: Monopolar resection results showed 20.1% necrosis versus bipolar resection results of 40.71% necrosis (p = ‹0.01).
Conclusions: The difference in tissue damage percentage can alter the final pathological result and cases of cancer potentially requiring radical treatment could be overlooked.


REFERENCES

  1. Starkman Jonathan, Santucci Richard. Comparison of bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate with standard transurethral prostatectomy: shorter stay, earlier catheter removal and fewer complications. BJU Int 2005;95:69-71.

  2. Botto Henry, Lebret Thierry, Barré Philippe, et al, Electrovaporization of the Prostate with the Gyrus Device. J Endourol 2001;15:313-6.

  3. Wendt-Nordahl G, Hacker A, Fastenmeier K, et al. New bipolar resection device for transurethral resection of prostate: first ex-vivo and in-vivo evaluation. J Endourol 2005;19:1203-9.

  4. Marberger H, Decristoforo A, Marberger M. Indications and techniques of transurethral prostatectomy. Int Urol Nephrol 1972;4:241-50.

  5. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R. Complications of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP)—Incidence, Management, and Prevention. Eur Urol 2006;50:969-79.

  6. Amr Hawary, Karim Mukhtar, Andrew Sinclair, Ian Pearce. Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Syndrome: Almost Gone but Not Forgotten. J Endourol 2009;23:2013-20.

  7. Issa Mutta. Technological Advances in Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: Bipolar versus Monopolar TURP. J Endourol 2008;22:1587-95.

  8. Bhansali M, Patankar S, Dobhada S, Khaladkar S. Management of Large (60 g) Prostate Gland: PlasmaKinetic Superpulse (Bipolar) versus Conventional (Monopolar) Transurethral Resection of the Prostate. J Endourol 2009;23:141-5.

  9. Mamoulakis C, Trompetter M, de la Rosette J. Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate: the ‘golden standard’ reclaims. Curr Opin Urol 2009;19:26-32.

  10. Hoekstra R, van Melick H, Kok E, Bosch R. A 10-year follow-up after transurethral resection of the prostate, contact laser prostatectomy and electrovaporization in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia; long-term results of a randomized controlled trial. BJU Int 2010;106:822-6.

  11. Berardinelli F, Hinh P, Wang R. Minimally invasive surgery in management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Minerva Urol Nefrol 2009;61:269-89.

  12. Meeks J, Habermacher G, Le B, Smith N. Delayed Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer With Neuroendocrine Differentiation After Laser TURP. Urology 2008;72:948.e11-2.

  13. Merrill RM, Wiggins CL. Incidental detection of population-based prostate cancer incidence rates through transurethral resection of the prostate. Urol Oncol 2002;7:213-9.

  14. Jackson E, Steven A, Bigler J. Prostate cancer detection in candidates for open prostatectomy. J Urol 1998;160(6Pt1):2107-10.

  15. Das A, Kennet K, Sutton T, Fraundorfer M, Gilling PJ. Histologic Effects of Holmium:YAG Laser Resection versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate. J Endourol 2000;14:459-62.

  16. Huang X, Wang XH, Qu LJ, et al. Bipolar Versus Monopolar Transurethral Resection of Prostate: Pathologic Study in Canines. Urology 2007;70:180-4.

  17. Ko R, Tan AH, Chew BH, et al. Comparison of the thermal and histopathological effects of bipolar and monopolar electrosurgical resection of the prostate in a canine model. BJU Int 2010;105:1314-7.

  18. Wang D, Bird V, Leonard V. Use of Bipolar Energy for Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumors: Pathologic Considerations. J Endourol 2004;18:578-82.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com