Limits...
Plasmakinetic resection technology for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Li S, Kwong JS, Zeng XT, Ruan XL, Liu TZ, Weng H, Guo Y, Xu C, Yan JZ, Meng XY, Wang XH - Sci Rep (2015)

Bottom Line: Meta-analyses showed that PKRP significantly improved Qmax at 12 months, but no significant difference was found for other efficacy outcomes.In terms of safety, treatment of PKRP was associated with reduced drop in serum sodium, lower TUR syndrome, reduced need of blood transfusion, clot retention, and shorter catheterization time and hospital stay; in contrast, there were no significant differences in the analysis of operative time, postoperative fever, and long-term postoperative complications.In summary, current evidence suggests that, although PKRP and TURP are both effective for BPH, PKRP is associated with additional potential benefits in efficacy and more favorable safety profile.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: 1] Department of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan University, Wuhan, People's Republic of China [2] Center for Evidence-based and Translational Medicine, Wuhan University, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.

ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to compare plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in terms of efficacy and safety. Published RCTs were searched from PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Library up to April 10, 2014. After methodological quality assessment and data extraction, meta-analysis was performed using the STATA 12.0 software. 18 reports of 16 RCTs were included in this analysis. Meta-analyses showed that PKRP significantly improved Qmax at 12 months, but no significant difference was found for other efficacy outcomes. In terms of safety, treatment of PKRP was associated with reduced drop in serum sodium, lower TUR syndrome, reduced need of blood transfusion, clot retention, and shorter catheterization time and hospital stay; in contrast, there were no significant differences in the analysis of operative time, postoperative fever, and long-term postoperative complications. In summary, current evidence suggests that, although PKRP and TURP are both effective for BPH, PKRP is associated with additional potential benefits in efficacy and more favorable safety profile. It may be possible that PKRP may replace the TURP in the future and become a new standard surgical procedure.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Flow-chart of selecting RCTs for analysis.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4496666&req=5

f1: Flow-chart of selecting RCTs for analysis.

Mentions: The initial search yielded a total of 874 reports. This study selection process is illustrated in a PRISMA flow diagram (Fig. 1). As a result, 18 reports192021222324252627282930313233343536 describing 16 RCTs19202223242527282930313233343536 enrolling 1645 participants were eventually included. Characteristics of included studies and findings of their assessment of risk of bias are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. All the 16 included studies used the Plasmakinetic system19202223242527282930313233343536. The baselines of them were similar. Besides, a number of studies did not report the required outcome indicators and we thereby estimated the standard deviations2529323536.


Plasmakinetic resection technology for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Li S, Kwong JS, Zeng XT, Ruan XL, Liu TZ, Weng H, Guo Y, Xu C, Yan JZ, Meng XY, Wang XH - Sci Rep (2015)

Flow-chart of selecting RCTs for analysis.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4496666&req=5

f1: Flow-chart of selecting RCTs for analysis.
Mentions: The initial search yielded a total of 874 reports. This study selection process is illustrated in a PRISMA flow diagram (Fig. 1). As a result, 18 reports192021222324252627282930313233343536 describing 16 RCTs19202223242527282930313233343536 enrolling 1645 participants were eventually included. Characteristics of included studies and findings of their assessment of risk of bias are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. All the 16 included studies used the Plasmakinetic system19202223242527282930313233343536. The baselines of them were similar. Besides, a number of studies did not report the required outcome indicators and we thereby estimated the standard deviations2529323536.

Bottom Line: Meta-analyses showed that PKRP significantly improved Qmax at 12 months, but no significant difference was found for other efficacy outcomes.In terms of safety, treatment of PKRP was associated with reduced drop in serum sodium, lower TUR syndrome, reduced need of blood transfusion, clot retention, and shorter catheterization time and hospital stay; in contrast, there were no significant differences in the analysis of operative time, postoperative fever, and long-term postoperative complications.In summary, current evidence suggests that, although PKRP and TURP are both effective for BPH, PKRP is associated with additional potential benefits in efficacy and more favorable safety profile.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: 1] Department of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan University, Wuhan, People's Republic of China [2] Center for Evidence-based and Translational Medicine, Wuhan University, Wuhan, People's Republic of China.

ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to compare plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in terms of efficacy and safety. Published RCTs were searched from PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Library up to April 10, 2014. After methodological quality assessment and data extraction, meta-analysis was performed using the STATA 12.0 software. 18 reports of 16 RCTs were included in this analysis. Meta-analyses showed that PKRP significantly improved Qmax at 12 months, but no significant difference was found for other efficacy outcomes. In terms of safety, treatment of PKRP was associated with reduced drop in serum sodium, lower TUR syndrome, reduced need of blood transfusion, clot retention, and shorter catheterization time and hospital stay; in contrast, there were no significant differences in the analysis of operative time, postoperative fever, and long-term postoperative complications. In summary, current evidence suggests that, although PKRP and TURP are both effective for BPH, PKRP is associated with additional potential benefits in efficacy and more favorable safety profile. It may be possible that PKRP may replace the TURP in the future and become a new standard surgical procedure.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus