Comparison between complication rates of laser prostatectomy electrocautery transurethral resection of the prostate: A population-based study

Authors

  • Alexandre Larouche Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
  • Andreas Becker University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Department of Urology
  • Jonas Schiffmann Martini-Clinic, Prostate Cancer Center, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf
  • Florian Roghmann Department of Urology, Ruhr University Bochum, Marienhospital, Herne, Germany
  • Giorgio Gandaglia Department of Urology, Vita-Salute, San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
  • Nawar Hanna Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
  • Zhe Tian Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
  • Paul Perrotte Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
  • Thorsten Schlomm Martini-Clinic, Prostate Cancer Center, Universitiy Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
  • Markus Graefen Martini-Clinic, Prostate Cancer Center, Universitiy Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
  • Sascha Ahyai Department of Urology, University-Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
  • Pierre Karakiewicz
  • Quoc-Dien Trinh Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, Brigham and Women´s Hospital / Dana-Farber Cancer Institut, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
  • Maxine Sun Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, Canada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.1790

Abstract

Introduction: We compare the complication rates and length of stay (LOS) of laser transurethral resection of the prostate (L-TURP) versus electrocautery transurethral resection of the prostate (E-TURP) in a population-based cohort. L-TURP has shown enhanced intraoperative safety and equivalent efficacy relative to E-TURP in several high volume centres.

Methods: Relying on the Florida Datafile as part of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases (SID) between 2006 and 2008, we identified 8066 men with benign prostate hyperplasia who underwent L-TURP or E-TURP. Chi-square and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare baseline characteristics. A multivariable linear regression model was used to analyze the effect of L-TURP versus E-TURP on complication rates and LOS.

Results: Overall complication rates did not differ significantly for L-TURP compared to E-TURP in univariable (8.8 vs. 7.4%, p = 0.1) and multivariable analyses (odds ratio [OR]: 1.06, confidence interval [CI]: 0.85-1.32, p = 0.6). Individuals undergoing E-TURP were less likely to experience a LOS in excess of 1 day (46.2 vs. 59.7%, p < 0.001). A lower risk to experience a LOS in excess of 1 day was confirmed for patients undergoing L-TURP after a multivariable linear regression model (OR: 0.37, CI: 0.23-0.58, p < 0.001), but not for a LOS in excess of 2 days (OR: 0.96, CI: 0.83-1.10, p = 0.2).

Conclusions: Patient characteristics and perioperative safety were similar for L-TURP and E-TURP patients. However, LOS patterns demonstrated a modest benefit for L-TURP compared to E-TURP patients.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2014-06-19

How to Cite

Larouche, A., Becker, A., Schiffmann, J., Roghmann, F., Gandaglia, G., Hanna, N., Tian, Z., Perrotte, P., Schlomm, T., Graefen, M., Ahyai, S., Karakiewicz, P., Trinh, Q.-D., & Sun, M. (2014). Comparison between complication rates of laser prostatectomy electrocautery transurethral resection of the prostate: A population-based study. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 8(5-6), e419–24. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.1790

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 5-6 (2014): CUAJ June

Section

Original Research

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.