保留膀胱颈的经尿道前列腺电切与标准术式的疗效比较
Comparison of the Efficacy of Bladder Neck Preserving TURP with Standard TURP
摘要: 目的:比较保留膀胱颈的TURP与标准TURP的疗效。方法:研究选取2019年6月~2020年6月因前列腺增生于我院行经尿道前列腺电切术(transurethral resection of prostate, TURP)的患者137例,根据是否保留膀胱颈分为实验组(保留膀胱颈的TURP) 58例和对照组(标准TURP) 79例。比较两组的围手术期指标,术后6个月的国际前列腺症状评分(international prostatic symptom score, IPSS)、最大尿流率(maximum urinary flow rate, Qmax)和包括逆行射精在内的并发症发生率。结果:两组在手术时间、留置导尿管时间、血红蛋白下降、住院时间等方面差异无统计学意义。术后随访6个月两组IPSS评分与最大尿流率亦无明显差异。实验组逆行射精发生率明显低于对照组(32.8% vs 77.2%, P < 0.001),但尿路梗阻、尿失禁、膀胱颈挛缩等并发症两组无明显差异。结论:与标准的TURP相比,保留膀胱颈的TURP在减少术后逆行射精率方面提供了更令人满意的临床结果。
Abstract: Objective: To compare the efficacy of bladder neck preserving TURP with standard TURP. Methods: 137 patients receiving transurethral resection of prostate due to prostate hyperplasia in our hospital from June 2019 to June 2020 were selected. According to whether the bladder neck was preserved or not, the patients were divided into experimental group (TURP with preserved bladder neck) 58 cases and control group (standard TURP) 79 cases. Perioperative indicators, international prostatic symptom score (IPSS), maximum urine flow rate (Qmax), and incidence of complications including retrograde ejaculation were compared between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in operation time, catheterization time, hemoglobin decrease and hospital stay. There was no significant difference in IPSS score and Qmax between the two groups after 6 months follow-up. The incidence of retrograde ejaculation in the experimental group was significantly lower than that in the control group (32.8% vs 77.2%, P < 0.001), but there were no significant differences in urinary tract obstruction, urinary incontinence, bladder neck contracture and other complications between the two groups. Conclusions: Compared with standard TURP, bladder neck sparing TURP provided a more satisfactory clinical outcome in reducing postoperative retrograde ejaculation rates.
文章引用:王卫珍, 姚璇. 保留膀胱颈的经尿道前列腺电切与标准术式的疗效比较[J]. 临床医学进展, 2021, 11(10): 4668-4673. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2021.1110686

1. 引言

良性前列腺增生(benign prostatic hyperplasia, BPH)是男性泌尿系统中最常见的疾病,是当代社会严重的公共卫生问题 [1]。尽管是良性疾病,但其以尿路梗阻为特点的下尿路症状(lower urinary tract symptoms, LUTS)严重影响了患者的生活质量 [2] [3]。尽管新的微创手术方法不断发展,经尿道前列腺电切术(transurethral resection of the prostate, TURP)仍然是治疗BPH导致的LUTS的金标准手术治疗方法 [4] [5]。

标准TURP的关键是经尿道切除前列腺包膜和膀胱颈内的增生前列腺组织同时保护精阜以下的尿道组织 [6] [7]。在标准术TURP术中,术者为了获得更通畅的膀胱出口,往往对膀胱颈进行过度的环周切除,这可能会增加术中出血量,提高前列腺膀胱连接处穿孔风险 [8] [9] [10]。随着对前列腺以及膀胱解剖研究认识的深入以及临床经验的积累,越来越多的研究指出TURP术中保留膀胱颈并不会影响手术解除LUTS症状的效果 [11] [12]。一项长期随访的研究甚至指出保留膀胱颈的TURP可以减少术中出血,降低术后尿失禁、膀胱颈挛缩以及逆行射精等并发症的发生 [13]。

本研究回顾性地收集了2019年6月~2020年6月因前列腺增生于我院行经尿道前列腺电切术(transurethral resection of prostate, TURP)的患者137例,根据是否保留膀胱颈分为实验组(保留膀胱颈的TURP) 58例和对照组(标准TURP) 79例。比较两组的围手术期指标,术后6个月的国际前列腺症状评分(international prostatic symptom score, IPSS)、最大尿流率(maximum urinary flow rate, Qmax)和包括逆行射精在内的并发症发生率以求评估保留膀胱颈的TURP术的有效性与安全性。

2. 资料与方法

2.1. 一般资料

研究选取2019年6月~2020年6月因前列腺增生于我院行经尿道前列腺电切术的患者137例,年龄53~61岁,平均66岁,病程1~8年,平均病程3.9年。根据是否保留膀胱颈分为实验组(保留膀胱颈的TURP) 58例,平均年龄(67.5 ± 8.52)岁,平均病程(4.1 ± 2.1)年;对照组(标准TURP) 79例,平均年龄(66.7 ± 9.27)岁,平均病程(3.7 ± 1.9)年。两组患者年龄、病程等临床资料无明显差异。本研究得到了本院伦理委员会批准。

2.2. 纳入排除标准

纳入标准:经直肠指检、彩色多普勒超声明确诊断为良性前列腺增生且手术指征明确的患者;临床病例资料完整;随访资料完整;患者签署知情同意书。

排除标准:术前尿动力学检查显示逼尿肌收缩不足或过度活动;有尿失禁、尿道狭窄、逆行射精、前列腺癌病史;既往有前列腺、膀胱颈或尿道手术史。

2.3. 保留膀胱颈的TURP手术方式

为了保留膀胱颈组织,从距离膀胱颈0.5~0.8 cm处开始切除,其余步骤可与标准TURP相同。对于增生或突出到膀胱的前列腺组织,为了避免对膀胱颈肌肉纤维造成损伤,对侵入膀胱并在膀胱颈周围增生的前列腺组织进行切除手术。手术均使用27f连续流切除镜(Richard Wolf, Germany)进行,冲洗液中含1.5%甘露醇。使用ValleyLab Forcex电刀进行切割和凝血(80 W和120 W)。

2.4. 有效性与安全性指标

有效性指标:术后6个月国际前列腺症状评分(international prostatic symptom score, IPSS):通过问卷表方式记录7类前列腺相关症状发生频率和一项生活质量评分,用于定量评估下尿路症状患者症状严重程度 [14];术后6个月最大尿流率(maximum urinary flow rate, Qmax)。

安全性指标:围手术期指标(手术时间、留置导尿管时间、血红蛋白下降、住院时间);并发症(尿路梗阻、尿失禁、膀胱颈挛缩、逆行射精)。

2.5. 统计学方法

采用SPSS 25.0软件(SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL)统计分析,符合正态分布的连续变量用均数 ± 标准差(SD)表示,采用独立样本t检验(Independent-samples t test)进行比较。分类变量以绝对数字与百分比表示,采用卡方检验(chi-squared test)。P < 0.05差异有统计学意义。

3. 结果

3.1. 术前基线数据

两组患者术前前列腺体积、前列腺特异性抗原(prostate specific antigen, PSA)、国际前列腺症状评分、最大尿流率组间均无明显差异(P > 0.05) (表1)。

3.2. 围手术期指标

两组患者手术时间、留置导尿管时间、血红蛋白下降、住院时间均未见明显差异(P > 0.05) (表2)。

Table 1. Baseline data

表1. 基线数据

Table 2. Comparison of perioperative indexes

表2. 围手术期指标比较

3.3. 有效性指标与并发症

术后随访6个月两组IPSS评分与最大尿流率亦无明显差异。实验组逆行射精发生率明显低于对照组(32.8% vs 77.2%, P < 0.001),但尿路梗阻、尿失禁、膀胱颈挛缩等并发症两组无明显差异(P > 0.05) (表3)。

Table 3. Effectiveness index and complications (follow-up for 6 months)

表3. 有效性指标与并发症(随访6个月)

4. 讨论

膀胱颈是膀胱基底部的一部分,呈层状结构,与深三角肌层结合 [15]。其在浅表肌深处与逼尿肌相连,深肌层为呈圆形辐射的较小的肌束 [16]。尽管膀胱颈在尿控中的作用仍存在争议但其在生殖过程中起着重要作用。对男性而言,膀胱颈闭合有利于顺行射精 [17]。射精时膀胱颈肌层其由去甲肾上腺素能神经支配,其主动收缩进而避免逆行射精的发生 [18]。在我们的研究中,我们进行了保留膀胱颈的TURP,并将该技术的结果与标准TURP进行了比较。两组患者手术时间、置管时间、血红蛋白下降、住院时间、IPSS、Qmax、膀胱颈挛缩、尿道狭窄发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义。

值得关注的是,保留膀胱颈组的患者逆行射精发生率明显低于标准TURP组(32.8% vs 77.2%, P < 0.001)。既往研究显示经尿道TURP术后逆行射精率约为70%~90%,它不仅导致男性不育,而且还损害了患者的性交满意度 [19]。尿道内括约肌(膀胱颈部平滑肌)被认为是“压缩室”中不可缺少的一部分,与尿道外括约肌(横纹括约肌)一起收缩组成封闭的空间,射精过程中,精液在射精前到达前列腺尿道,积聚并驻留其中 [20]。因此TURP术中切除膀胱颈部平滑肌则导致“压缩室”无法形成,精液则从膀胱颈逆行射入膀胱。

另一种治疗BPH的选择是经尿道前列腺切开(transurethral incision of the prostate, TUIP),可以降低逆行射精率,但研究显示TUIP的缺点是在正中叶增生处切除前列腺体积不足,无法获得标本进行病理诊断,可能偶尔导致前列腺癌的漏诊 [21]。在TURP过程中,我们强调对膀胱颈的保护,特别是膀胱颈的肌纤维,我们的研究结果显示保留膀胱颈后防止精液在射精时返回膀胱,大大减少逆行射精的发生率。同时,我们的研究也显示保留膀胱颈并不会减低解除梗阻的手术效果。由此可见保留膀胱颈的TURP在保证手术有效性的同时增强了手术的安全性,有重要的临床意义。

5. 结论

与标准的TURP相比,保留膀胱颈的TURP在保证手术有效性的同时减少了术后逆行射精率的发生率,是值得推广的手术方式。因本研究病例数量有限且为回顾性的队列研究,需要大样本的随机对照研究进一步验证。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Berry, S.J., Coffey, D.S., Walsh, P.C. and Ewing, L.L. (1984) The Development of Human Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia with Age. The Journal of Urology, 132, 474-479.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)49698-4
[2] Zhu, B.S., Jiang, H.C. and Li, Y. (2016) Impact of Urethral Catheterization on Uroflow during Pressure-Flow Study. Journal of International Medical Research, 44, 1034-1039.
[3] Unnikrishnan, R., Almassi, N. and Fareed, K. (2017) Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Evaluation and Medical Management in Primary Care. Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, 84, 53-64.
https://doi.org/10.3949/ccjm.84a.16008
[4] Peng, M., Yi, L. and Wang, Y. (2016) Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate vs Plasmakinetic Resection of the Prostate: A Randomized Prospective Trial with 12-Month Follow-Up in Mainland China. Urology, 87, 161-165.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.08.038
[5] Besiroglu, H. and Ozbek, E. (2017) Letter to the Editor Regarding the Article “The Effects of Statins on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in Elderly Patients with Metabolic Syndrome”. World Journal of Urology, 35, 177-178.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1844-0
[6] Thomas, A.W., Cannon, A., Bartlett, E., Ellis-Jones, J. and Abrams, P. (2005) The Natural History of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction in Men: Minimum 10-Year Urodynamic Follow-Up of Untreated Bladder Outlet Obstruction. BJU International, 96, 1301-1306.
[7] Qu, M., Zhu, F., Chen, H., Lian, B., Jia, Z., Shi, Z., Li, J., Wang, Y., Sun, Y. and Gao, X. (2019) Palliative Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Study of 188 Patients. Journal of Endourology, 33, 570-575.
https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0108
[8] Yeni, E., Unal, D., Verit, A. and Gulum, M. (2002) Minimal Transurethral Prostatectomy plus Bladder Neck Incision versus Standard Transurethral Prostatectomy in Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Randomised Prospective Study. Urologia Internationalis, 69, 283-286.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000066127
[9] Kusljic, S., Aneja, J. and Manias, E. (2017) Incidence of Complications in Men Undergoing Transurethral Resection of the Prostate. Collegian, 24, 3-9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colegn.2015.07.001
[10] Rassweiler, J., Teber, D., Kuntz, R. and Hofmann, R. (2006) Complications of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP)—Incidence, Management, and Prevention. European Urology, 50, 969-979.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.042
[11] Asimakopoulos, A.D., Mugnier, C., Hoepffner, J.L., Piechaud, T. and Gaston, R. (2012) Bladder Neck Preservation during Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy: A Standardised Technique Using a Lateral Approach. BJU International, 110, 1566-1571.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11604.x
[12] Ronzoni, G. and De Vecchis, M. (1998) Preservation of Anterograde Ejaculation after Transurethral Resection of Both the Prostate and Bladder Neck. British Journal of Urology, 81, 830-833.
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00658.x
[13] Liao, J., Zhang, X., Chen, M., Li, D., Tan, X., Gu, J., Hu, S. and Chen, X. (2019) Transurethral Resection of the Prostate with Preservation of the Bladder Neck Decreases Postoperative Retrograde Ejaculation. Wideochirurgia I Inne Techniki Maloinwazyjne, 14, 96-101.
https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2018.79536
[14] Elkhodair, S., Parmar, H.V. and Vanwaeyenbergh, J. (2005) The Role of the IPSS (International Prostate Symptoms Score) in Predicting Acute Retention of Urine in Patients Undergoing Major Joint Arthroplasty. Surgeon, 3, 63-65.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1479-666X(05)80063-0
[15] Gosling, J.A., Dixon, J.S. and Jen, P.Y. (1999) The Distribution of Noradrenergic Nerves in the Human Lower Urinary Tract. A Review. European Urology, 36, 23-30.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000052314
[16] Gosling, J.A. (1986) The Distribution of Noradrenergic Nerves in the Human Lower Urinary Tract. Clinical Science, 70, 3s-6s.
https://doi.org/10.1042/cs070s003
[17] He, L.Y., Zhang, Y.C., He, J.L., Li, L.X., Wang, Y., Tang, J., Tan, J., Zhong, K., Tang, Y.X. and Long, Z. (2016) The Effect of Immediate Surgical Bipolar Plasmakinetic Transurethral Resection of the Prostate on Prostatic Hyperplasia with Acute Urinary Retention. Asian Journal of Andrology, 18, 134-139.
https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.157395
[18] Barazani, Y., Stahl, P.J., Nagler, H.M. and Stember, D.S. (2012) Management of Ejaculatory Disorders in Infertile Men. Asian Journal of Andrology, 14, 525-529.
https://doi.org/10.1038/aja.2012.29
[19] Gil-Vernet, J.M., Alvarez-Vijande, R., Gil-Vernet, A. and Gil-Vernet, J.M. (1994) Ejaculation in Men: A Dynamic Endorectal Ultrasonographical Study. British Journal of Urology, 73, 442-448.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1994.tb07612.x
[20] Gray, M., Zillioux, J., Khourdaji, I. and Smith, R.P. (2018) Contemporary Management of Ejaculatory Dysfunction. Translational Andrology and Urology, 7, 686-702.
https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2018.06.20
[21] Lourenco, T., Shaw, M., Fraser, C., MacLennan, G., N’Dow, J. and Pickard, R. (2010) The Clinical Effectiveness of Transurethral Incision of the Prostate: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials. World Journal of Urology, 28, 23-32.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-009-0496-8