Prostatic spiral versus prostatic urolume wallstent for urinary retention due to benign prostatic hyperplasia: A long-term comparative study

G. Guazzoni, F. Montorsi, F. Bergamaschi, P. Consonni, P. Bellinzoni, P. Rigatti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Thirty-eight high-risk surgical patients with urinary retention due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were treated by placement of a prostatic spiral under local anesthesia (group 1: 20 patients) or a prostatic stent under intravenous sedation (group 2: 18 patients). At the 1-year follow-up, mean peak flow rate, residual urine volume and subjective symptoms scale were significantly better in the stent group (p <0.01). The rate of postoperative urinary incontinence and dislocation of the device was greater in the spiral group. Cystoscopic manipulation and removal of the device were definitely easier with the spiral. Both the prostatic spiral and stent have specific roles in the treatment of urinary retention in the unfit BPH patient. The selection of the most suitable device depends on accurate patient assessment.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)332-336
Number of pages5
JournalEuropean Urology
Volume24
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 1993

Keywords

  • Benign prostatic hyperplasia
  • Prostatic diseases
  • Prostatic spiral
  • Prostatic stent

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Prostatic spiral versus prostatic urolume wallstent for urinary retention due to benign prostatic hyperplasia: A long-term comparative study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this