Download PDF
Urologie Scan 2016; 03(01): 37-55
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-111248
Fortbildung
Benignes Prostatasyndrom
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Operative Therapie des benignen Prostatasyndroms – Standards und Alternativen

Steffen Lebentrau
,
Martin Schostak
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
17 March 2016 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Symptome des unteren Harntrakts (LUTS) infolge eines benignen Prostatasyndroms (BPS) betreffen anhand aktueller Untersuchungen 3 % der Männer in der Altersgruppe 45 – 49 und 33 % der Männer ab dem 85. Lebensjahr, wobei fast ein Viertel dieser Männer im weiteren Verlauf eine medikamentöse Therapie und 5 % eine operative Therapie benötigen werden. Eingedenk der demografischen Entwicklung mit einer prognostizierten steten Zunahme der Altersgruppe „65 + “ kommt den Symptomen und Folgeerkrankungen des BPS eine hohe und weiter steigende Bedeutung in der ambulanten und stationären urologischen Versorgung zu. Neben einleitenden Ausführungen zur Anatomie des unteren Harntrakts, zur Diagnostik und Indikationsstellung für die operative Therapie des BPS wird die Vielfalt der möglichen Operationsverfahren unter Orientierung am Standard der monopolaren transurethralen Prostataresektion mit Beschreibung der Operationsprinzipien, typischer Indikationen und Komplikationen erläutert. Die wesentlichen Steuerungsgrößen für die Wahl des Operationsverfahrens sind Allgemeinzustand bzw. Komorbidität des Patienten, eine etwaige gerinnungsaktive Medikation und das Prostatavolumen.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Abrams P, Blaivas JG, Stanton SL et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function. The International Continence Society Committee on Standardisation of Terminology. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 1988; 114: 5-19
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Abrams P. New words for old: lower urinary tract symptoms for "prostatism". BMJ (Clinical Research ed) 1994; 308: 929-930
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002; 21: 167-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Berges R, Dreikorn K, Höfner K et al. Diagnostik und Differenzialdiagnostik des benignen Prostatasyndroms (BPS). In: Deutschen Gesellschaft für Urologie (DGU) und Berufsverband der Deutschen Urologen (BDU). 2009: 2
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Höfner K, Bach T, Berges R et al. S2e Leitlinie Therapie des Benignen Prostatasyndroms (BPS). In: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie e.V. – Arbeitskreis Benignes Prostatasyndrom der Akademie der Deutschen Urologen. 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Speakman M, Kirby R, Doyle S et al. Burden of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) – focus on the UK. BJU Int 2015; 115: 508-519
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Krambeck AE, Jacobson DJ, McGree ME et al. Effectiveness of medical and surgical therapies for lower urinary tract symptoms in the community setting. BJU Int 2012; 110: 1332-1337
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Statistisches Bundsamt. Die 50 häufigsten Operationen der vollstationären Patientinnen und Patienten in Krankenhäusern (Rang, Anzahl, Anteil in Prozent). Gliederungsmerkmale: Jahre, Deutschland, Geschlecht, Art der Operation.. In: Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes. 28.09.2015
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Young HH. A new procedure (punch operation) for small prostatic bars and contracture of the prostatic orifice. J Am Med Assoc 1913; 60: 253-257
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Millin T. Retropubic prostatectomy a new extravesical technique: report on 20 cases. Lancet 1945; 246: 693-696
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G et al. The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology 1997; 49: 822-830
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Barry MJ, Fowler Jr FJ, O'Leary MP et al. The American Urological Association symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The Measurement Committee of the American Urological Association. J Urol 1992; 148: 1549-1557 discussion 1564
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Gravas S, Bach T, Bachmann A et al. Guidelines on the Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), incl. Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO). European Association of Urology 2015;
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Ahmad S, Manecksha RP, Cullen IM et al. Estimation of clinically significant prostate volumes by digital rectal examination: a comparative prospective study. Can J Urol 2011; 18: 6025-6030
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Cornu JN, Ahyai S, Bachmann A et al. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Functional Outcomes and Complications Following Transurethral Procedures for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Resulting from Benign Prostatic Obstruction: An Update. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 1066-1096
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Mayer EK, Kroeze SG, Chopra S et al. Examining the ‘gold standard’: a comparative critical analysis of three consecutive decades of monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) outcomes. BJU Int 2012; 110: 1595-1601
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Negro CL, Muir GH. Chronic urinary retention in men: how we define it, and how does it affect treatment outcome. BJU Int 2012; 110: 1590-1594
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kessler TM, Gerber R, Burkhard FC et al. Ultrasound assessment of detrusor thickness in men – can it predict bladder outlet obstruction and replace pressure flow study?. J Urol 2006; 175: 2170-2173
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Grabe M, Bartoletti R, Bjerklund Johansen TE et al. Guidelines on Urological Infections. European Association of Urology 2015;
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Richter S, Lang R, Zur F et al. Infected urine as a risk factor for postprostatectomy wound infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1991; 12: 147-149
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Hoffmeister HM, Bode C, Darius H et al. Unterbrechung antithrombotischer Behandlung (Bridging) bei kardialen Erkrankungen. Kardiologe 2010; 4: 365-374
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Robert G, Descazeaud A, Azzouzi AR et al. [Benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery and anticoagulant therapy: review of the literature by the French Association of Urology]. Prog Urol 2009; 19: 517-523
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rabbitts JA, Nuttall GA, Brown MJ et al. Cardiac risk of noncardiac surgery after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents. Anesthesiology 2008; 109: 596-604
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rade JJ, Hogue Jr CW. Noncardiac surgery for patients with coronary artery stents: timing is everything. Anesthesiology 2008; 109: 573-575
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Nowak B, Israel CW, Willems S et al. Empfehlungen zum Einsatz von Elektrokautern bei Patienten mit Herzschrittmachern und implantierten Defibrillatoren. Kardiologe 2010; 4: 383-388
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A et al. Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol 2008; 180: 246-249
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Fujiwara A, Nakahira J, Sawai T et al. Prediction of clinical manifestations of transurethral resection syndrome by preoperative ultrasonographic estimation of prostate weight. BMC Urol 2014; 14: 67
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Mebust WK, Holtgrewe HL, Cockett AT et al. Transurethral prostatectomy: immediate and postoperative complications. A cooperative study of 13 participating institutions evaluating 3,885 patients. 1989. J Urol 2002; 167: 999-1003 discussion 1004
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Madersbacher S, Marberger M. Is transurethral resection of the prostate still justified?. BJU Int 1999; 83: 227-237
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Akman T, Binbay M, Tekinarslan E et al. Effects of bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate on urinary and erectile function: a prospective randomized comparative study. BJU Int 2013; 111: 129-136
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lourenco T, Shaw M, Fraser C et al. The clinical effectiveness of transurethral incision of the prostate: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. World J Urol 2010; 28: 23-32
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Gratzke C, Schlenker B, Seitz M et al. Complications and early postoperative outcome after open prostatectomy in patients with benign prostatic enlargement: results of a prospective multicenter study. J Urol 2007; 177: 1419-1422
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Varkarakis I, Kyriakakis Z, Delis A et al. Long-term results of open transvesical prostatectomy from a contemporary series of patients. Urology 2004; 64: 306-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Ferretti M, Phillips J. Prostatectomy for benign prostate disease: open, laparoscopic and robotic techniques. Can J Urol 2015; 22 (Suppl. 01) 60-66
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Mariano MB, Graziottin TM, Tefilli MV. Laparoscopic prostatectomy with vascular control for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 2002; 167: 2528-2529
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Sotelo R, Clavijo R, Carmona O et al. Robotic simple prostatectomy. J Urol 2008; 179: 513-515
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Autorino R, Zargar H, Mariano MB et al. Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic and Laparoscopic Simple Prostatectomy: A European-American Multi-institutional Analysis. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 86-94
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Asimakopoulos AD, Mugnier C, Hoepffner JL et al. The surgical treatment of a large prostatic adenoma: the laparoscopic approach – a systematic review. J Endourol 2012; 26: 960-967
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Gravas S, Laguna P, Ehrnebo M et al. Seeking evidence that cell kill guided thermotherapy gives results not inferior to those of transurethral prostate resection: results of a pooled analysis of 3 studies of feedback transurethral microwave thermotherapy. J Urol 2005; 174: 1002-1006 ; discussion 1006
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Hoffman RM, Monga M, Elliott SP et al. Microwave thermotherapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 9 CD004135
    Google Scholar
  • 41 Bouza C, Lopez T, Magro A et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of Transurethral Needle Ablation in symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. BMC Urol 2006; 6: 14
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Kuntz RM, Lehrich K, Ahyai SA. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates greater than 100 grams: 5-year follow-up results of a randomised clinical trial. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 160-166
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Naspro R, Suardi N, Salonia A et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates >70 g: 24-month follow-up. Eur Urol 2006; 50: 563-568
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Tan A, Liao C, Mo Z et al. Meta-analysis of holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for symptomatic prostatic obstruction. Br J Surg 2007; 94: 1201-1208
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Elzayat E, Habib E, Elhilali M. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in patients on anticoagulant therapy or with bleeding disorders. J Urol 2006; 175: 1428-1432
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Tyson MD, Lerner LB. Safety of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in anticoagulated patients. J Endourol 2009; 23: 1343-1346
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Shah HN, Kausik V, Hegde S et al. Evaluation of fluid absorption during holmium laser enucleation of prostate by breath ethanol technique. J Urol 2006; 175: 537-540
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Wilson LC, Gilling PJ, Williams A et al. A randomised trial comparing holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection in the treatment of prostates larger than 40 grams: results at 2 years. Eur Urol 2006; 50: 569-573
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Hauser S, Rogenhofer S, Ellinger J et al. Thulium laser (Revolix) vapoenucleation of the prostate is a safe procedure in patients with an increased risk of hemorrhage. Urol Int 2012; 88: 390-394
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Bach T, Netsch C, Pohlmann L et al. Thulium:YAG vapoenucleation in large volume prostates. The J Urol 2011; 186: 2323-2327
    Google Scholar
  • 51 Chung DE, Wysock JS, Lee RK et al. Outcomes and complications after 532 nm laser prostatectomy in anticoagulated patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 2011; 186: 977-981
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Rajbabu K, Chandrasekara SK, Barber NJ et al. Photoselective vaporization of the prostate with the potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser in men with prostates of > 100 mL. BJU Int 2007; 100: 593-598 ; discussion 598
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Chuang YC, Huang CC, Kang HY et al. Novel action of botulinum toxin on the stromal and epithelial components of the prostate gland. J Urol 2006; 175: 1158-1163
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Chin PT, Bolton DM, Jack G et al. Prostatic urethral lift: two-year results after treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 2012; 79: 5-11
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 55 McNicholas TA, Woo HH, Chin PT et al. Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift: surgical technique and multinational experience. Eur Urol 2013; 64: 292-299
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Armitage JN, Cathcart PJ, Rashidian A et al. Epithelializing stent for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review of the literature. J Urol 2007; 177: 1619-1624
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Armitage JN, Rashidian A, Cathcart PJ et al. The thermo-expandable metallic stent for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review. BJU Int 2006; 98: 806-810
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar