Continuous Flow and Conventional Resectoscope Methods in Transurethral Prostatectomy: Comparative Study

Abstract

The continuous flow resectoscope is claimed to be superior to the conventional resectoscope with respect to blood loss, resection time and rate, and irrigant absorption. These purported advantages were tested by a study of the results of transurethral resection of the prostate in 36 patients assigned randomly to 2 groups: 20 patients operated on with the continuous flow resectoscope and 16 operated on with the conventional resectoscope. No statistically significant differences for blood loss, resection rate or irrigant absorption were found between the 2 groups. The preference of the surgeon is the most important determininant in instrument choice.