Materials and Methods: Twenty-seven patients aged between 52 and 65 years underwent either monopolar TURP (Group 1, n: 15) or bipolar TURP (Group 2, n: 12). Preoperative and perioperative data were recorded and analyzed, including the maximal flow rate (Qmax), prostate volume, intraoperatively resected tissue volume, resection velocity, and operation time.
Results: Preoperative mean prostate volumes in Groups 1, and 2 were 82.6 ± 21 ml and 78.8 ± 12 ml, respectively (p=0.117). Preoperative mean serum sodium levels were 140.4 ± 2.3 mmol/l in Group 1 and 139.8 ± 2.2 mmol/l in Group 2. Preoperative mean serum hemoglobin values were 15 ± 0.8 g/dl in Group 1, and 14.5 ± 2.2 g/dl in Group 2. Postoperative mean serum sodium levels were 130.6 and 136.7 mmol/l, in Groups 1, and 2, respectively. Eight patients from the monopolar TURP group exhibited a notable drop in serum sodium levels. In the monopolar TURP group, there were 5 occurrences of TUR syndrome and 2 patients needed blood transfusions due to a mean decrease of 5 g/dl in hemoglobin levels. Complications were identified in 7 cases.
Conclusion: Compared to monopolar TURP, bipolar TURP is associated with a shorter hospital stay, and lower transfusion and complication rates.
Surgical indications were retention of urine, failure of medical therapy, and presence of hematuria. Monopolar TURP (Group 1) was applied to fifteen and bipolar TURP (Group 2) to twelve patients. Karl Storz brand 24 F cystoscopes were used for both groups. The irrigation fluid was distilled water in monopolar TURP, and normal saline in bipolar TURP. Twentyone patients had been on an alpha-1-adrenoreceptor blocker and fifteen patients on a combination of an alpha-1-adrenoreceptor blocker and 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors for an average duration of 9 months before the surgery. At the end of the monopolar and bipolar TURP, a 22 or 24 Fr 3-way urethral Foley catheter was inserted and normal saline irrigation was used. Continuous saline irrigation was done until the urine drained from the urethral Foley catheter became clear with time. The catheters were removed when the urine became clear without continuous saline irrigation within postoperative 3-5 days. Preoperative and perioperative data were recorded and analyzed, including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximal flow rate (Qmax), prostate volume, intraoperatively resected prostatic tissue volume, resection velocity, operative time, changes in the serum levels of hemoglobin, and sodium, length of postoperative hospital stay.
Statistical Analysis
All statistical analyzes were performed with SPSS (version
25, Armonk, US). Continuous variables were defined as mean
and standart deviation (SD), and cathegorical variables as
frequencies (n) and percentages (%). Continuous variables were
compared with Mann- Whitney U test and categorical variables
with Pearson chi-squared test. P-values of less than 0.05 were
deemed statistically significant.
Table 1. The clinical outcome comparison between monopolar vs bipolar TURP
Postoperatively mean duration of hospital stays were 3 ± 2.3 days in Group 1 and 1 ± 1.3 days in Group 2 (p<0.001). The length of hospital stays for patients in the bipolar TURP group was less than those in the other group. Postoperative 6-month IPSS results revealed statistically significant improvement. In none of the TURP groups any urethral or meatal strictures were not noted during the 6-month follow-up period.
Throughout the past three decades, TURP-related morbidities have decreased [15]. Perioperative bleeding and TUR syndrome, a result of excessive absorption of hypotonic solution, are still serious complicaions, and 2% of patients experience TUR syndrome. If the gland is larger than 45 ml and the excision takes more than 90 minutes, the risk is higher. If it occurs, abort the procedure and give diuretics and hypertonic saline [16]. According to our findings, bipolar TURP reduced the chance of developing TUR syndrome compared to monopolar TURP due to a lesser amount of change in serum sodium levels. Compared to monopolar TURP, bipolar TURP allows surgeons to perform the procedure more slowly and to remove more prostate tissue. Also, compared to monopolar TURP, bipolar TURP appears to be more effective at removing tissue and controlling bleeding [17]. In contrast to the need for blood transfusion in two cases in the monopolar TURP group, no transfusions were necessary in the bipolar TURP group. At this point, we should consider the fact that the use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors such as dutasteride decreases the bleeding because of a decrease in gland vascularity.
Bipolar TURP also required shorter postoperative hospital stay than the other group. According to Starkman et al., individuals who underwent Gyrus bipolar TURP had their catheters withdrawn on average 1.4 days sooner than those who underwent monopolar TURP [18]. Eaton and Francis found that with the Gyrus method, 32 out of 40 patients could be discharged on the same day of the operation. Operators preferred bipolar TURP over monopolar TURP in multicenter research of the procedure due to cleaner resection surfaces (64%) and greater efficacy when resecting the apex of the prostate glands (93%) [19]. The utilization of monopolar TURP in large prostate glands is limited, Bhansali et al. compared bipolar TURP with monopolar TURP in their series of 70 patients with prostate glands >60 ml and reported that bipolar TURP showed excellent results in terms of perioperative blood loss, change in serum sodium levels, and duration of catheterization [20].
The main limitation of our study is very limited number of patients who were included in the study. However, due to the lack of prospectively designed studies on this subject, we think that our current study will contribute to the literature.
Ethics Committee Approval: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Al-Iraqia University College of Medicine (Approval date, and registration number: 05.03.2023-FM.SA /36).
Informed Consent: An informed consent was obtained from all the patients.
Publication: The results of the study were not published in full or in part in form of abstracts.
Peer-review: Externally and internally peer-reviewed.
Authorship Contributions: Any contribution was not made by any individual not listed as an author. Concept - J.A.K., A.H.E.; Design - J.A.K., A.H.E.; Supervision - J.A.K., A.H.E.; Resources - J.A.K., A.H.E.; Materials - J.A.K., A.H.E.; Data Collection and/or Processing - J.A.K., A.H.E.; Analysis and/ or Interpretation – J.A.K., A.H.E.; Literature Search - J.A.K., A.H.E.; Writing Manuscript - J.A.K., A.H.E.; Critical Review - J.A.K., A.H.E.
Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Financial Disclosure: The authors declare that this study received no financial support.
1) Lowe FC. Goals for benign prostatic hyperplasia therapy.
Urology 2002;59:1-2.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01554-0
2) Yu X, Elliott SP, Wilt TJ, McBean AM. Practice patterns
in benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical therapy: The
dramatic increase in minimally invasive technologies. J
Urol 2008;180:241-5.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.039
3) Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Seitz M, Schlenker
B, Hermanek P, et al. Morbidity, mortality and early
outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: A
prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J
Urol 2008;180:246-9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.058
4) Ho HS, Cheng CW. Bipolar transurethral resection of
prostate: a new reference standard? Curr Opin Urol
2008;18:50-5.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0b013e3282f194db
5) Fagerström T, Nyman CR, Hahn RG. Bipolar transurethral
resection of the prostate causes less bleeding than the
monopolar technique: a single-centre randomized trial of
202 patients. BJU Int 2010;105:1560-4.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09052.x
6) Yoon CJ, Kim JY, Moon KH, Jung HC, Park TC.
Transurethral resection of the prostate with a bipolar
tissue management system compared to conventional
monopolar resectoscope: One-year outcome. Yonsei Med
J 2006;47:715-20.
https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2006.47.5.715
7) Kwon JS, Lee JW, Lee SW, Choi HY, Moon HS.
Comparison of effectiveness of monopolar and bipolar
transurethral resection of the prostate and open
prostatectomy in large benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Korean J Urol 2011;52:269-73.
https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2011.52.4.269
8) Ruszat R, Wyler SF, Seitz M, Lehmann K, Abe C, Bonkat
G, et al. Comparison of potassium- titanyl-phosphate laser
vaporization of the prostate and trans- urethral resection of
the prostate: update of a prospective non-randomized twocentre
study. BJU Int 2008;102:1432-9.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07905.x
9) Bouchier-Hayes DM, Van Appledorn S, Bugeja P, Crowe
H, Challacombe B, Costello AJ. A randomized trial of
photoselective vaporization of the prostate using the
80-W potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser vs transurethral
prostatectomy, with a 1-year follow-up. BJU Int
2010;105:964-9.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08961.x
10) Mohanty NK, Vasudeva P, Kumar A, Prakash S, Jain
M, Arora RP. Photoselective vaporization of prostate
vs. transurethral resection of pros- tate: A prospective,
randomized study with one year follow- up. Indian J Urol
2012;28:307-12.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.102708
11) Ruszat R, Wyler S, Forster T, Reich O, Stief CG, Gasser
TC, et al. Safety and effectiveness of photoselective
vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in patients on ongoing
oral anticoagulation. Eur Urol 2007;51:1031-41.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.08.006
12) Bachmann A, Schürch L, Ruszat R, Wyler SF, Seifert
HH, Müller A, et al. Photoselective vaporization (PVP)
versus transurethral resection of the pros- tate (TURP): A
prospective bi-centre study of perioperative morbidity and
early functional outcome. Eur Urol 2005;48:965-71.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2005.07.001
13) Kim DK, Kim SJ, Moon HS, Park SY, Kim YT, Choi HY,
et al. The role of TURP in the detection of prostate cancer
in BPH patients with previously negative prostate biopsy.
Korean J Urol 2010;51:313-7.
https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2010.51.5.313
14) Holtgrewe HL. Transurethral prostatectomy. Urol Clin
North Am 1995;22:357-68.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7762111/
15) Mebust WK. Transurethral prostatectomy. Urol Clin North
Am 1990;17:575-85.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2197768/
16) Mebust WK, Holtgrewe HL, Cockett AT, Peters PC.
Transurethral prostatectomy: immediate and postoperative
complications. A cooperative study of 13 participating
institutions evaluating 3,885 patients. J Urol 1989;141:243-7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)40731-2
17) Patel A, Adshead JM. First clinical experience with
new transurethral bipolar prostate electrosurgery
resection system: Controlled tissue ablation
(coblation technology). J Endourol 2004;18:959-64.
https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2004.18.959
18) Starkman JS, Santucci RA. Comparison of bipolar
transurethral resection of the prostate with standard
transurethral prostatectomy: shorter stay, earlier catheter
removal and fewer complications. BJU Int 2005;95:69-71
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05253.x