TUIP

AcronymDefinition
TUIPTransurethral Incision Prostate
References in periodicals archive ?
The decision of performing TUIP was made purely on the anatomical appearance at the preoperative cystoscopy and the wide open cavity after the initial incision.
The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was used to determine the optimal cutoff value of prostate volume, which characterize long-term reoperation after TUIP.
The ROC analysis showed an optimal cutoff value of prostate volume of 29 cc to characterize long-term reoperation after TUIP, with area under the curve (AUC) of 0.
However, after 12 months follow-up, the degree of improvement in all voiding parameters was significantly higher in patients undergoing TUIP for prostate <30 cc compared to those with larger prostates (p < 0.
7) However, there is no data which characterize those patients who might obtain long-term benefit from TUIP.
TUIP was comparable to TURP in terms of functional outcomes within the first 12 months after surgery, apart from Qmax that was more significantly improved with resection.
Similar comparable improvement was detected between both groups within the first 12-months after TUIP.
Only two earlier studies reported a comparable symptomatic benefit of TUIP with TURP which persisted for up to 5 years.
In a randomized prospective study, the objective results were better after TURP than TUIP due to the frequent formation of complex adhesions or synechiae observed within 24 months between the prostatic lobes and the excessive scarring of the incisions in 5/21 patients that further deteriorated the flow rate with time.
3% of patients undergoing TUIP using electrocautery, including the need in 0.
Of interest, re-operation after TUIP for the management of LUTS secondary to BPE was mostly needed after 12 months.
1) Moreover, a significantly lower risk for retrograde ejaculation was reported in men undergoing TUIP than after TURP (27.