Abstract：Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of two ways (Otis knife cutting and hard urethral probe dilation, S-shaped urethral probe and hard urethral probe dilation) to treat urethral stricture after TURP. Methods: Forty-one cases of urethral stricture after TURP were divided into two groups according to the will of patients: one group of 22 patients given transurethral Otis knife cutting and hard urethral dilation probe, and one group of 19 patients undergoing S-shaped urethral probe and hard urethral probe dilation. All patients were subjected to implantation of No. F20 Foley catheter for 1 month, and regular urethral dilation was performed for 3 months after urethral catheter removal. All patients were followed up for 6 months. The preoperative, operative and postoperative clinical parameters were compared between two groups, including quality of life score (QOL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), residual urine volume (RUV), operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, the curative rate, complications and postoperative incontinence. Results: After two groups of patients were followed up for 6 months, QOL, Qmax, and RUV were significantly improved, and no statistically significant difference was found between two groups (P>0.05). Blood loss, the curative rate, and urinary incontinence between tow groups showed no significant difference (P>0.05). The operation time and hospital time were signififcantly longer in the patients with the Otis knife incision group than in those with S-shaped urethral probe dilatation group (P<0.05) . Conclusions: Both ways can be used to treat urethral stricture after TURP. S-shaped urethral probe and hard urethral probe dilation had shorter operative time and hospital stay, no risk of urinary incontinence, and can be easily accepted by patients.
董滢, 雷普, 卜小斌. 两种不同术式+尿道扩张治疗TURP后尿道狭窄的疗效比较[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2017, 6(4): 244-247.
Dong Ying, Lei Pu, Bo Xiaobin. The comparison of two different surgical approaches and urethral dilation for urethral stricture following TURP. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE UROLOGY, 2017, 6(4): 244-247.
[1] 梅骅,陈凌武,高新.泌尿外科学手术学.北京:人民卫生出版社,2008:721-721. [2] 杨飞,周祥福,湛海伦,等.经尿道前列腺电切术后尿道狭窄的原因分析.中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版),2012,6(1):57-59. [3] Nabi G, Devinder S, Doga RN, et al. Malignant anterior urethral strictures: a rare complication of transurethral resection of malignant prostate. Int Urol Nephrol, 2002,34(1):73-74. [4] 李新,宋思吉,蒋涛,等.TURP后尿道狭窄临床分析及对策研究.第三军医大学学报,2013,35(15):1596-1598. [5] 韩见知,庄乾元.实用腔内泌尿外科学.广州:广东科技出版社,2001:143-146. [6] Oosterlinck W. Treatment of bulbar urethral strictures a review, with personal critical remarks. Sci World J, 2003,27:443-454. [7] Rourke KF, Jordan GH. Primary urethral reconstruction: the cost minimized approach to the bulbous urethral stricture. J Urol, 2005,173(4):1206-1210. [8] Kamp S, Knoll T, Osman MM, et al. Low-power holmium: YAG laser urethrotomy for treatment of urethral strictures: functional outcome and quality of life. J Endourol, 2006,20(1):38-41. [9] 刘晓龙,单玉喜,阳东荣.经尿道绿激光瘢痕汽化与尿道狭窄内切开及电切术治疗尿道狭窄的疗效比较.中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版),2009,3(4):30-32. [10] Morey AF, McAninch JW. Reconstruction of posterior urethral disruption injuries: outcome analysis in 82 patients. J Urol, 1997,157(2):506-510. [11] 徐月敏,宋鲁杰.尿道狭窄最佳术式选择的探讨.现代泌尿外科杂志,2011,16(2):91-92. [12] 王军,刘会范,贾占奎,等.直视下尿道内切开术联合尿道扩张治疗男性尿道狭窄36例疗效分析.临床泌尿外科杂志,2013,28(4):276-277,281. [13] 李天明,王伟,刘德祥.尿道内切开及电切术治疗男性尿道狭窄36例报告.中国医师杂志,2006,8(2):251. [14] Tunc M, Tefekli A, KadiogluA, et al. A prospective randomized protocol to examine the efficacy of postinternalurethrotomy dilations for recurrent bul-bomembranous urethral Strictures. Urology, 2002,60(2):239-244. [15] Dogra PN, Ansari MS, Gupta NP, et al. Holmium laser core through urethrotomy for traumatic obliterative strictures of urethra: initial experience.Urology, 2004,64(2):232-236. [16] 孙晨明,廖继强,张志成,等.尿道内切开术治疗24例外伤性尿道狭窄.中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版),2011,5(3):225-227. [17] 董自强,宋兴福,许晓明,等.尿道内切开术后支架管导尿管留置时间的研究.中国现代医学杂志,2006,16,(10):1589-1591. [18] 何建光,范郁会,党建功,等.经尿道内切开术治疗尿道狭窄和闭锁.临床泌尿外科杂志,2009,24(12):931-932.
