Continuous Flow and Conventional Resectoscope Methods in Transurethral Prostatectomy: Comparative Study
- 1 February 1982
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Journal of Urology
- Vol. 127 (2), 257-259
- https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)53732-5
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.This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Editorial CommentJournal of Urology, 1979
- Operative Blood Loss in Transurethral ProstatectomyJournal of Urology, 1979
- Hydraulic Hemostasis in Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Using the Iglesias Continuous Suction ResectoscopeJournal of Urology, 1977
- New Iglesias Resectoscope with Continuous Irrigation, Simultaneous Suction and Low Intravesical PressureJournal of Urology, 1975
- Iglesias Resectoscope with Continuous Irrigation, Suction and Low Intravesical PressureBritish Journal of Urology, 1975
- Studies of Blood Loss During Transurethral Prostatic ResectionJournal of Urology, 1941