The Impact Analysis Of Urodynamics Examination To Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment And Prognosis

Objective: To evaluate and research theclinical value of urodynamics examination inbenign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in the diagnosis, treatment and prognosis.Methods: Reviewed the clinical and urine flow data of265BPH patients before andafter treatment,who with urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) as chief complaint in ourHospital and the First Affiliated Hospital of Suzhou University during August2004toSeptember2013.They were assigned into surgery and drug therapy group(referred to asgroup C, give up surgery after theunderwent urodynamics examination, etc.) according totreatment method; The surgery group is divided into only undergoing abdominal colordoppler ultrasound (referred to as group A) and undergoing abdominal color Dopplerultrasound examination and urodynamics examination (referred to as group B),Accordingto the size of the prostate,they were divided into three subgroups: A1(≤30g), A2(30~60g), A3(≥60g), B1(≤30g), B2(30~60g), B3(≥60g), all patients in A, B groupundergoing transurethral prostatic plasma bipolar electrosurgical excision procedure(TUPKP). The international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life score (QOL),maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), residual urine volume (PVR) of patients in A, B, Cgroup were comparied before and after treatment,and the various indicators of patients in A,B subgroups were compariedtoo,then statistical analysis.Results:(1) IPSS scores, QOL scores, PVR of patientsin group A mostly hadimproved significantly after treatment, the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05), but IPSS scores, QOL scores ingroup A1were not statistically significant (P>0.05); IPSS scores, QOL score s, PVR, Qmax of patients in group Bwere significantlyimproved after treatment, the differences were statistically significant (P <0.05);(2)IPSSscore, QOL score, PVR of patients between group Aand B were no statistical significance(P>0.05) before treatment; IPSS scores, QOL scoreswere different between the twogroups after treatment, but mainly concentrated in the small prostate (≤30g), and the differences were statistically significant (P <0.05);The differences between were notstatistically significant in the large prostate group, but it doesn’t mean that curative effectis completely no differenceafter treatment. The differences in sub-groups were notstatistically significant (P>0.05) after PVR treatment.(3) IPSS scores, QOL score s, PVR,Qmax of patients ingroup C mostly improved after treatment, the differences werestatistically significant (P <0.05).Conclusions: The value of transabdominal ultrasonography which to the diagnosis ofBPH patients, the preliminary assessmentand the determinant of opreation indications ofbladder outlet obstruction (BOO) can not be ignored, but to the diagnosis of BPH patientswith some small volume,or the judgment of treatment options and operation results of BPHpatients with the bladder forced urinous myopathy,dysfunction such as overactive bladder(OAB) is still deficiency.Urodynamics examination should be combined in thepreoperative, thus the lack of adequate surgical indications of patients with BPH wereeliminated,or it will carry their risks.It is better for patients with small volume prostate toreceive urodynamics examination before operation.Divert to drug treatment or otherconservative treatment, also can relieve lower urinary tract symptoms in these patients whoare not suitable for the operation from the urodynamics examination,and improve thequality of life.