PATIENTS AND METHODS: Over a one-year period, we randomly assigned patients with an indication for surgery for BPH and who met inclusion criteria to treatment with either PKRP or TURP. We measured prostate volume by transrectal ultrasound, relief of bladder outlet obstruction, operative time, decline in serum sodium and hemoglobin, weight of resected prostatic chips, duration of catheterization and hospital stay. Patients were evaluated one month after discharge for obstructive symptoms. Complications were also recorded.
RESULTS: Of 102 patients enrolled, 51 underwent PKRP and 51 underwent TURP. Relief of obstructive symptoms and mean operative time showed no statistically significant difference. The PKRP group had a smaller decline in hemoglobin than the TURP group (0.6 g/dL vs 1.8 g/dL, P=.01), a lower reduction in serum sodium levels (1.03 mmol/L vs 5.01 mmol/L, P=.01), a shorter catheterization time (37.2 hours versus 57.7 hours, P=.03) and a shorter hospital stay (1.5 days versus 2.6 days, P=.02). One patient in the bipolar PKRP group needed recatheterization versus four patients in the TURP group.
CONCLUSION: PKRP reduces morbidity with an outcome similar to conventional monopolar TURP in the treatment of BPH.
METHODOLOGY: Patients with GERD and a control group of healthy asymptomatic volunteers were recruited. All subjects underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and the acid-saline perfusion test. Symptomatic ERD and NERD patients were given rabeprazole 20 mg twice daily for 2 weeks and their response to treatment assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 105 subjects were recruited: ERD=37 (symptomatic=24, asymptomatic=13), NERD=34 and controls=34. During saline perfusion, only the NERD group recorded a significantly higher sensitivity score compared to controls (2.74±7.28 vs. 0) (p=0.035). During acid perfusion, symptomatic ERD (15.42±13.42) and NERD (16.71±15.04) had significantly higher scores versus controls and asymptomatic ERD patients (both p<0.001). The mean %∆ reflux symptom score following treatment was significantly higher in symptomatic ERD patients compared to NERD patients (89.08±21.67 vs. 58.53±32.54; p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with NERD were a generally hypersensitive group while asymptomatic ERD patients represent a hyposensitive group of patients which merits further study.