KTP Green Light Prostatectomy Compared With TUR-P in High Risk Patients
Not Applicable
Active, not recruiting
- Conditions
- BPH (Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia)
- Interventions
- Procedure: KTP laserProcedure: TUR-P
- Registration Number
- NCT02075736
- Lead Sponsor
- University of Helsinki
- Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to compare safety and efficacy of Green Light PVP (Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate) compared to TUR-P in high risk patients
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
- Sex
- Male
- Target Recruitment
- 40
Inclusion Criteria
- Men with anticoagulant medication undergoing surgery for BPH
Exclusion Criteria
- Previous prostate surgery
- Carcinoma of the prostate
- Neurogenic bladder
- Bladder carcinoma
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description KTP laser KTP laser device TUR-P TUR-P device
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Re-bleeding rate requiring hospitalization two months postoperatively
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Length of catheterization Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an expected maximum of one week Residual urine 0, 3, 6 and 12 months Length of hospital stay Participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an expected maximum of one week IPSS (International Prostate Symptom Score) 0, 3, 6 and 12 months symptom score
Maximum flow rate (Qmax) 0, 3, 6 and 12 months DAN-PSS (Danish Prostate Symptom Score) 0, 3, 6 and 12 months IIEF (International Index of Erectile Function) questionnaire 0,12 months TRUS (transrectal ultrasound) 0, 12 months Perioperative bleeding Time of operation
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Helsinki University Hospital
🇫🇮Helsinki, Finland