Evaluating transurethral resection of the prostate over twenty years: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Joao G. Porto, Ansh Bhatia, Abhishek Bhat, María Camila Suarez Arbeláez, Rubén Blachman-Braun, Khushi Shah, Ankur Malpani, Diana M. Lopategui, Thomas Herrmann, Robert Marcovich, Hemendra N. Shah
Abstract
Abstract Purpose The goal of this systematic review is to assess the temporal changes in outcomes and complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) from 2000 to 2022. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 103 randomized clinical trials from PubMed on TURP, involving 8521 patients. Studies were grouped by years: 2000–2004, 2005–2009, 2010–2014, and 2015–2022. We assessed International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Peak Flow (Qmax), Post-void residue of urine (PVR), and post-operative complications. Heterogeneity was ranked as low (I 2 < 25%), moderate (I 2 = 25–75%), or high (I 2 > 75%). Results TURP significantly improved IPSS, Qmax, and PVR, with the most recent studies showing superior results in IPSS and Qmax after 3 years compared to 2000–2004 studies. Heterogeneity in PVR was high (I 2 = 100%). No negative impact on erectile function was observed. Complication rates included TURP syndrome (2%), bleeding (8%), and blood transfusion (6%), but elevated heterogeneity with difference between the groups was seen in clot evacuation (I 2 = 83%) and urinary tract infections (I 2 = 82%). Other complications were urinary retention (4%), incontinence (8%), urethral stricture (3%), bladder neck stenosis (2%). Conclusion In the last 20 years there has not been a clear trend in the results of TURP. The found heterogeneity may indicate a lack of standardization in TURP procedures. However, symptomatic improvement among patients is uniform, which supports this procedure as a historical benchmark surgical treatment for BPH.