AURA Takes you to the home page
 

Aberdeen University Research Archive >
6 - All research >
All research >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2164/262

This item has been viewed 1 times in the last year. View Statistics

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
Lourenco2008(minimally).pdf382.32 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Minimally invasive therapies for the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement : systematic review of randomised controlled trials
Authors: Lourenco, Tania
Pickard, Robert
Vale, Luke David
Grant, Adrian Maxwell
Fraser, Cynthia Mary
MacLennan, Graeme Stewart
N'Dow, James Michael Olu
University of Aberdeen, School of Medicine & Dentistry, Division of Applied Health Sciences
Keywords: Catheter Ablation
Endoscopy
Prostatic Hyperplasia
Issue Date: 9-Oct-2008
Publisher: BMJ
Citation: Lorenco, T., Pickard, R., Vale, L., Grant, A., Fraser, C., MacLennan, G., and N'Dow, J., (2008) Minimally invasive therapies for the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement : systematic review of randomised controlled trials. British Medical Journal, 337, pp. 1662-1670.
Abstract: Objective: To compare the effectiveness and risk profile of minimally invasive interventions against the current standard of transurethral resection of the prostate. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Electronic and paper records up to March 2006. Review methods: We searched for all relevant randomised controlled trials. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality. Meta-analyses of prespecified outcomes were performed with fixed and random effects models and reported using relative risks or weighted mean difference. Results 3794 abstracts were identified; 22 randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. These provided data on 2434 participants. The studies evaluated were of moderate to poor quality with small sample sizes. Minimally invasive interventions were less effective than transurethral resection of the prostate in terms of improvement in symptom scores and increase in urine flow rate, with most comparisons showing significance despite wide confidence intervals. Rates of second operation were significantly higher for minimally invasive treatments. The risk profile of minimally invasive interventions was better than that of transurethral resection, with fewer adverse events. The results, however, showed significant heterogeneity. Conclusion: Which minimally invasive intervention is the most promising remains unclear. Their place in the management of benign prostate enlargement will continue to remain controversial until well designed and well reported randomised controlled trials following CONSORT guidelines prove they are superior and more cost effective than drug treatment or that strategies of sequential surgical treatments are preferred by patients and are more cost effective than the more invasive but more effective tissue ablative interventions such as transurethral resection.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2164/262
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1662
ISSN: 0959-8138
Appears in Collections:Applied Health Sciences research
All research

SFX Query

Items in AURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 


The University of Aberdeen
King's College
Aberdeen
AB24 3FX
Tel: +44 (0)1224-272000