<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJU</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Urology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2160-5440</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/oju.2023.1312059</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJU-129713</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (B-TURP) Including Large Prostate Glands in Kinshasa, DR Congo
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Dieudonné</surname><given-names>Moningo Molamba</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Richard</surname><given-names>Demongawi Koseka</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Alpha</surname><given-names>Mafuta Tsita</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Pitchou</surname><given-names>Mbey Mukaz</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Junior</surname><given-names>Liloku Konga</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Timothée</surname><given-names>Mawisa Kemfuni</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tacite</surname><given-names>Mazoba Kpanya</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Pascal</surname><given-names>Eloko Mata Mazango</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Diangienda</surname><given-names>Nkutima Pablo</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Matthieu</surname><given-names>Loposso Nkumu</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bienvenu</surname><given-names>Lebwaze Massamba</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Fabrice</surname><given-names>Bokambadja Lolangwa</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Augustin</surname><given-names>Punga Maole</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Service of Urology, Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Kinshasa, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Pointe-à-Pitre Clinic, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Kinshasa, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff4"><addr-line>Department of Pathology, University Hospital of Kinshasa, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>07</day><month>12</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>13</volume><issue>12</issue><fpage>530</fpage><lpage>546</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>31,</day>	<month>October</month>	<year>2023</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>8,</day>	<month>December</month>	<year>2023</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>11,</day>	<month>December</month>	<year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Context: In DR Congo, prostate adenoma was treated solely by open surgery till the practice of minimally invasive surgery in 2012. Surgical management of large prostate glands has greatly improved over the last years. Even if open adenomectomy is indicated for prostate glands &gt; 80 ml, TURP is currently the gold standard. We report the resection time of TURP procedure, quality of life of the patients, the postoperative complications and outcomes of 152 patients with large prostate glands who went under Bipolar TURP from 2021 to 2022. 
  Patients and Methods: This is a prospective and evaluative study of 152 patients who underwent surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) from January 2021 to December 2022 using bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). The study variables were age, low urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), paraclinical parameters, prostate volume, resection time, length of hospital stay, results of histopathological analysis of resected tissues (prostate chips), complications and postoperative outcomes of the patients. All the patients underwent saline bipolar TURP. 
  Results: The mean age of the patients was 66.5 &#177; 9.3 years. Dysuria and acute urinary retention were the most predominant symptoms, 46.1% and 23.03% respectively. Arterial hypertension was the most common medical history (29.7%), or associated with diabetes mellitus (18.4%). The most frequent surgical history was the repair of the inguinal hernia in 21.7% of cases. Most of the patients had a prostate volume ≥ 80 ml (n = 91) in a relative frequency of 60% of cases. The mean prostate volume was 104.8 &#177; 60.4 ml. The volume of the prostate was correlated with the age of the patients (r = 0.321; p &lt; 0.001). Most prostate glands were resected within seventy-five (75) minutes. The resection time was correlated with the volume of the prostate (r = 0.467; p &lt; 0.001). However, the largest prostate gland measured by intrarectal ultrasound weighed 350 ml and was resected in 110 minutes. There was no correlation between the volume of the prostate and the resected tissues by bivariate analysis (r = 1.000; p &lt; 0.001). The average volume of the resected tissue in our series is 20 &#177; 68 g (Ranges: 12 - 45). Histopathological analysis revealed fibro adenomatous hyperplasia (FAH) in 70% of cases; BPH was associated with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and carcinoma of the prostate in 4% and 2% respectively. Uroflowmetry revealed that 86.3% of the patients had a dysuric curve preoperatively, compared to only 4% of patients postoperatively. The difference is significant with p &lt; 0.05. 119 patients (86.3%) had a Qmax &lt; 15 ml/s preoperatively, with significant improvement, Qmax &gt; 15 ml/s (96%) postoperatively. The post-void residual (PVR) was significant in the group of patients with prostate volume ≥ 80 ml (p &lt; 0.008). Preoperatively, 70% of patients had severe symptoms that were improved three months after the Bipolar TURP (74%). The improvement in quality of life depended on the severity of the symptoms; it was faster for mild and moderate symptoms and slow for severe symptoms. After three months postoperatively, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the quality of life (QOL) index were improved in 112 patients (74%). 
  Conclusion: Although conventional surgery (open adenomectomy) has been a standard treatment for large prostate adenomas, progress in minimally invasive techniques, mainly Bipolar TURP, seems to confer more advantages such as the low rate of complications, reduced length of hospital stay and improved quality of life for the patients.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Bipolar TURP</kwd><kwd> Large BPH</kwd><kwd> Quality of Life</kwd><kwd> Complications</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are common [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref2">2</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref4">4</xref>] . Benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH), also called benign prostatic hyperplasia, is the increased prostate volume without clinical signs of malignancy, causing variable degrees of obstruction to bladder emptying. It is the main pathology causing urination disturbance in elderly men. It is the most common benign tumor in men around fifty years and over [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref6">6</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref7">7</xref>] , and is the leading cause of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), even if these symptoms vary greatly from one individual to another. Large BPH is defined as having a volume ≥ 80 ml [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref8">8</xref>] .</p><p>Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) is a surgical procedure which consists of resecting the prostate in chips through urethra, using an endoscope and under visual control. It is the gold standard for surgical treatment of BPH with a volume less than 80 ml. Bipolar TURP differs from traditional monopolar TURP by the use of a double electrode allowing electricity output to the generator, and therefore the use of 0.9% physiological saline instead of glycocol. There is no risk of TURP syndrome [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref10">10</xref>] .</p><p>Bipolar transurethral resection has been developed in recent years to minimize current flow absorbed by the patient. This method is characterized by the placement of the neutral electrode in the right proximity of the conductive electrode. Since the irrigation solution (saline) produces extremely lower resistance than the one of tissues, a direct flow of current from the active electrode to the neutral electrode would occur when producing energy. A thermal effect would then be excluded. Some authors compared the results of bipolar TURP with other minimally invasive surgery techniques (HoLeP, Holmium) and open surgery and then concluded that TURP and HoLeP are feasible alternative to resect large BPH, improving the quality of life of the patients [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref11">11</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref12">12</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref13">13</xref>] .</p><p>The objective of this study is to evaluate the resection time, quality of life, the postoperative complications and outcomes of the patients with large prostate glands who underwent Bipolar TURP.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Patients and Methods</title><p>This study was performed at the University Hospital of Kinshasa and Pointe-&#224;-Pitre Clinic in Kinshasa from January 2021 to December 2022. We used study questionnaire for qualitative variables that were age, marital status, symptoms (LUTS), medical and surgical history, IPSS score and quality of life index (QOL). All patients were diagnosed with symptomatic BPH according to International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), bother score, Uroflowmetry, post void residual volume (PVR), digital rectal exam, and quantification of prostate volume by transrectal ultrasound. The resected prostate (prostate chips) were weighed after resection and sent for histopathological analysis.</p><p>All patients underwent bipolar saline TURP under spinal anesthesia. A 22 - 24 Fr two-way silicone catheter was placed postoperatively, and continuous bladder irrigation was used. Patients were seen for medical visit postoperatively at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months.</p><p>Sampling: To perform this study, we had a convenience sampling of one hundred and fifty-two (152) patients who suffered from benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) and went under surgery by Bipolar TURP. To be included, all patients with BPH had to have a medical file containing all the parameters of interest below.</p><p>Study Parameters: Different variables in this study are age, marital status, symptoms (LUTS), IPSS score and quality of life index (quality of life = QOL), medical history, weight of the prostate by intrarectal ultrasound (IRU), Uroflowmetry, Bladder scan, operation time, weight of resected chips, length of hospital stay, duration of bladder cathetering, histopathological analysis data and postoperative complications.</p><p>Data processing and analysis: We used Excel 2016 software and IBM SPSS 21 (Statistical Package for social sciences) version 21.0 for processing and data analysis. Different statistical tests were averaging, standard deviation, Chi-square test, Pearson Correlation (r), Spearman Correlation and the T-Student.</p><p>Surgical procedure: Transurethral resection of the prostate was performed according to the standard NESBIT technique [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref12">12</xref>] . We used the Olympus brand Ch.27 resector, different bipolar electrodes, and saline was used for irrigation</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><p>The average age of the patients was 66.5 &#177; 9.3 years (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). They were married in the majority of cases (75.6%). The Catholic (42.8%) and Protestant (25.7%) religions were predominant, followed by revivalist churches (19.1%).</p><p>Arterial hypertension was the most observed comorbidity (29.7%), associated with diabetes mellitus in 18.4%. The most common surgical history was inguinal hernia in 21.7% of cases.</p><p>Clinically, obstructive symptoms were predominant (69.1%), mainly dysuria (46.1%) and acute urinary retention (23.03%) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). There was a positive correlation between prostate volume and duration of symptoms (r = 0.267; p = 0.001) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). In relation to prostate volume, there was no significant difference between obstructive and irritative symptoms (p = 0.028). On the other hand, a statistically significant difference was observed between the volume of the prostate and the duration of symptoms (p = 0.001) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>).</p><p>Among 152 patients, n = 91 (60%) had a prostate volume ≥ 80 ml; with an average of 104.8 &#177; 60.4 ml (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>). The average value of PSA was 22.5 ng/ml (Ranges: 4 - 26.5). The minimum value was 1 ng/ml while the maximum value was &gt;100 ng/ml (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>). Most patients had a PSA level below 20 ng/ml for a prostate volume less than 200 ml.</p><p>The increase in urea and creatinin levels did not depend on prostate volume (p = 0.169 for urea, and p = 0.125 for creatinin). There was a negative correlation</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients according to sociodemographic data</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number (n = 152)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >%</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age (years) X &#177; ET</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66.5 &#177; 9.3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≤ 50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >51 - 60</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >61 - 70</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥71</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Marital status</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Married</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >115</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >75.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Widower</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Divorced</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.2</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>between the PSA level and the volume of the prostate by intrarectal ultrasound (IRU) (r = 0.250; p = 0.054) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>). The volume of the prostate was correlated with the age of the patients (r = 0.321; p = 0.000) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>).</p><p>Urine culture was pathological with a predominance of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae; 37.5% and 24.3% respectively. 15.8% of urine culture was sterile. Urine culture positivity was not significantly related to prostate volume (p = 0.197) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>). The post-void residual (PVR) was significant in the group of patients with prostate volume ≥ 80 ml (p = 0.008). Comparison of the proportions with other paraclinical parameters related to prostate volume did not prove statistically significant differences (p &gt; 0.05) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>).</p><p>The average resection time of the prostate was 75 minutes; the maximum resection time was 110 minutes for a prostate of 350 ml. This resection time was correlated with the volume of the prostate (r = 0.467; p &lt; 0.001) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>). The average volume of resected tissues (prostate chips) was 20 &#177; 65 grams which was not correlated with the volume of the remaining prostate due to the combination of resection and vaporization (r = 1.000; p &lt; 0.001) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>(b)).</p><p>Histopathological analysis concluded that FLMAH was present in 70% of cases; and associated with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and carcinoma of the prostate in 4% and 2% respectively (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>). All the patients went under bipolar TURP which was performed alone in 73.7% and associated with castration in 7.9% for prostate adenocarcinoma. The average length of hospital stay was 2.4 days in 80% (Ranges 3 - 7).</p><p>The average catheterization duration was 3 days. The majority of patients</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of the patients related to results of urine culture</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total (n = 152)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate ≤ 79 cc (n = 61)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate ≥ 80 cc (n = 91)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >p</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >CBUE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.197</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Escherichia coli</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57 (37.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20 (32.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37 (40.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >K. pneumoniae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37 (24.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 (29.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19 (20.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Proteus mirabilis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (3.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (4.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Streptococcus Hemolyticus</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (3.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (4.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Enterobacter cloacae</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (3.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pseudomonas aeruginosa</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (2.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (4.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Providencia rettgeri</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (2.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acinebacter specis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Candida tropicalis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (1.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Enterobacter Fecalis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (2.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Enterobacter serata</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (1.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (2.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Candida albicans</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (0.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sterile</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24 (15.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10 (16.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14 (15.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of paraclinical data in relation to prostate volume</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total (n = 152)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate ≤ 79 cc (n = 61)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate ≥ 80 cc (n = 91)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >p</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ultrasound</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >150 (98.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61 (100)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >91 (100)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.357</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >RVUC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8 (13.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (2.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.010</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Abdominal CT-Scan</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.578</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Uroflowmetry</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.078</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Dysuric curve</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >102 (67.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35 (57.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67 (73.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal curve</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36 (26.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17 (27.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19 (20.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non performed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14 (9.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9 (14.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (5,5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder-Scan</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.008</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal PVR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36 (23.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19 (31.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17 (18.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pathologic PVR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >103 (67.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33 (54)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70 (76.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non performed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (8.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9 (14.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (4.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cystoscopy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.218</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder cancer</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (4.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (2.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder cancer + stone</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (0.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Polyps</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (1.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder neck sclerosis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urethral stone</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1,3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Wrestling bladder</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >76 (50)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24 (39.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >52 (57.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal bladder</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60 (39.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28 (45.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32 (35.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urea</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.169</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >112 (73.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >48 (78.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64 (70.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pathologic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40 (26.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (21.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27 (29.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Creatinin</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.125</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >116 (76.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50 (82)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66 (72.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pathologic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36 (23.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 (18)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25 (27.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Serum electrolytes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.079</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >134 (88.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >57 (93.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77 (84.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pathologic</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 (11.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (6,6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14 (15.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Hemoglobin</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.508</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Anemia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19 (12.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7 (11.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (14.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Normal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >132 (86.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54 (88.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >78 (85.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients related to histopathological diagnosis</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total (n = 116)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate ≤ 79 cc (n = 33)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate ≥ 80 cc (n = 58)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >p</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pathological diagnosis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.686</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BPH</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >81 (70)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23 (20)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >58 (50)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate cancer Gleason 7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (6.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate cancer Gleason 8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder cancer</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (2.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (2.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BPH + Bladder cancer</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (1.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BPH + chronic prostatitis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7 (4.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (3.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (5.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate cancer Gleason 6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (0.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Prostate cancer Gleason 9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (1.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (2.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BPH + Prostate cancer Gleason</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non performed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36 (23.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (1.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>(75%) did not have postoperative complications. Urinary incontinence was the main complication (7.2%); 13.8% of the complications were minor (Grade 1 and 2); while 2% of patients (Grade 3, 4 and 5) had major complications according to Clavien Dindo classification.</p><p>Blood transfusion was influenced by preoperative hemoglobin rate. 7% of patients with hemoglobin &lt; 7 g/dl and 4% of patients with hemoglobin &gt; 7 g/dl have been transfused, respectively for preoperative anemia and per operative hemorrhage. Among 152 patients who went under bipolar TURP, one hundred and forty-eight (148) had a good postoperative issue (98.6%); while four(4) patients died, representing a mortality rate of 2.6%. The causes of death were pulmonary embolism (2 patients), sepsis with multiorgan failure (1 patient) and deglobulization (1 patient).</p><p>Preoperatively, the IPSS score of 106 patients (70%) was severe with bother symptoms of quality of life (QOL) compared to only 6 (4%) postoperatively. Three months postoperatively, the IPSS was improved in 112 patients (74%) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref>). The improvement in quality of life depended on the severity of symptoms; it was faster for mild and moderate symptoms and slow for severe symptoms (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table7">Table 7</xref>).</p><p>The average age of the patients was 66.5 &#177; 9.3 years. They were married in the majority of cases (75.6%). The Catholic (42.8%) and Protestant (25.7%) religions were predominant, followed by revivalist churches (19.1%).</p><p>Urine culture was pathological by the predominance of Escherichia Coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in 37.5% and 24.3% respectively. These germs are frequently isolated in the urine of patients with lower obstructive uropathy.</p><p>The post void residue (PVR) was significant in the group of patients with prostate volume ≥ 80 cc (p = 0.008). Cystoscopy diagnosed 55% of various pathologies such as bladder cancer, urethral stenosis, sclerosis of the bladder neck and urinary tract stones.</p><p>Histopathological analysis found fibro adenomatous hyperplasia in 70%, BPH was associated with bladder cancer and prostate cancer in 4% and 2% respectively (p = 0.686).</p><p>Most of our patients (75%) did not have post-operative complications. Urinary incontinence was the most encountered complication (7.2%). Most of the encountered complications were minor (Grade 1 and 2) in 13.8%; while 2% of patients (Grade 3, 4 and 5) had major complications according to the Clavien Dindo classification (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>).</p><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table7">Table 7</xref> show that 70% of patients had severe symptoms that were improved three months after the Bipolar TURP (74%). The improvement in quality of life depended on the severity of the symptoms; it was faster for mild and moderate symptoms and slow for severe symptoms.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>Benign prostatic hypertrophy affects 50% of men aged over 50 years. Its prevalence increases gradually with age; 90% of men over 80 years old are affected.</p><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Classification of surgical complications according to Clavien Dindo</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Complications</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="5"  >Clavien Dindo</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Hemorrhage</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10 (6.6%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7 (4.6%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urinary incontinence</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 (7.2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 (7.2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Erectile dysfunction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (4%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Perforation</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (2.6%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >AUR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (2.6%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urinary infection</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >None</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >114 (75%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TOTAL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >152 (100%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 (11.8%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (2%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table6" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref></label><caption><title> IPSS score of the patients</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >IPSS score</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >0 - 7 n (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >8 - 19 n (%)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >20 - 35 n (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Preoperative</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17 (11)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29 (19)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >106 (70)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Postoperative</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >112 (74)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34 (22)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (4)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table7" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table7">Table 7</xref></label><caption><title> IPSS score/Quality of life of patients 3 months postoperatively</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >IPSS S./QOL</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >0</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >1</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >3</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >4</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >5</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >6</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >TOTAL</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >0 - 7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46 (30%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >75 (49%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16 (11)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7 (5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >152 (100%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >8 - 19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39 (26%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >71 (47%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 (7%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (3%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7 (5%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 (7%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8 (5%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >152 (100%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >20 - 35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32 (21%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66 (43%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (9%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9 (6%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (9%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14 (9%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (3%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >152 (100%)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The average age of the patients was 66.5 &#177; 9.3 years (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>). Most of studies reveal an average age over the 6th decade respectively: 65.7 years, 69 &#177; 8, 70.13 years, 70 &#177; 6 and 71.2 &#177; 4.5 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref14">14</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref15">15</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref16">16</xref>] . Considering these results, we agree that BPH is pathology of the elderly with a high frequency relatively after 60 years. Dysuria and acute urinary retention were the main symptoms, respectively in 46.1% and 23.03% (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). These results confirm those of some studies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref15">15</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref16">16</xref>] But different from some authors who report pollakiuria as being the main symptom in 90% of cases [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref17">17</xref>] .</p><p>Hypertension was the most common medical history (29.7%); or associated with diabetes mellitus (18.4%) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). Hypertension and diabetes as comorbidities of BPH are described in different studies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref18">18</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref19">19</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref20">20</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref21">21</xref>] . Inguinal hernia was associated with BPH in 21.7% of cases (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). The occurrence of inguinal hernia is very common [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref15">15</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref16">16</xref>] . These hernias are due to abdominal hyperpressure following obstructive LUTS. Urine culture was pathological by the predominance of Escherichia Coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in 37.5% and 24.3% respectively (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>). These germs are frequently isolated in the urine of patients with lower obstructive uropathy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref18">18</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref22">22</xref>] .</p><p>This predominance of colonization by E. coli is due to the virulence of the germ and its properties to attach and migrate along the urinary tract because of its pili [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref23">23</xref>] .</p><p>Histopathological analysis found fibro-leiomyo-adenomatous hyperplasia (FLMAH) in 70% of cases; it was associated with urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and carcinoma of the prostate in 4% and 2% respectively (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>). Many studies do not mention the results of prostatic chips analysis after TURP [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref24">24</xref>] . We found one study that reported a high number of prostate carcinoma [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref18">18</xref>] . Most of the patients (86.3%) had a dysuric curve on preoperative uroflowmetry, but only 4% of patients had a dysuric curve postoperatively (p &lt; 0.05). Preoperatively, Qmax was &lt;15 ml/s including the significant post-void residual (PVR) in the group of patients with prostate volume ≥ 80 ml (p = 0.008), this Qmax has been improved significantly after TURP (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>). Our results are like those of other authors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref24">24</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref25">25</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref26">26</xref>] .</p><p>60% (Sixty percent) of patients had a prostate weight more than 80 ml. The largest resected prostate in our series was 350 ml. Some authors have successfully resected large prostates [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref15">15</xref>] . Other authors prefer laparoscopic surgery for large prostate glands [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref27">27</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref28">28</xref>] (volume of 75 to 190 and 500 ml), others practice embolization followed by TURP [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref29">29</xref>] , (volume of 463 ml), (r = 0.321; p &lt; 0.001) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref19">19</xref>] . Our results are similar to those of other authors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref9">9</xref>] who did not report a significant difference which could be explained by ethnic and genomic considerations. The bivariate analysis did not find a correlation between the volume of the prostate and the volume of the resected tissue (prostate chips). The average volume of the resected tissue in our series is 20 &#177; 68 g (Ranges: 12 - 45) (r = 1.000; p = 1.00) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>(b)). Our results are similar to those of some authors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref30">30</xref>] who found that there is no correlation between the ultrasound weight of BPH and prostate chips (r = 0.214, p &lt; 0.05). However, some authors suggest having resected 70% of the adenomatous prostate [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref31">31</xref>] . Most of patients had a PSA level below 20 ng/ml for a prostate volume less than 200 ml. The correlation was not statistically significant (r = 0.250; p = 0.054). The mean value of PSA level was 22.5 ng/ml (Ranges: 4 - 26.5). The minimum value was 1 ng/ml while the maximum value was &gt;100 ng/ml (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>). Our results differ from those of other studies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref32">32</xref>] . These authors worked on BPH of standard volume (30 - 80 ml) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref31">31</xref>] . Some authors who have resected large BPH report an average PSA level of 4.66 ng/ml [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref25">25</xref>] , unlike other authors who report an average level of 62.19 ng/ml because of the high proportion of prostate carcinoma in their series [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref18">18</xref>] . Most of prostate glands were resected within seventy-five (75) minutes. The resection time was almost proportionally correlated with the volume of the prostate (r = 0.467; p &lt; 0.001). However, the largest prostate (350 ml) was resected in 110 minutes (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>). Apart from a single study which reports an average resection time of 182.3 &#177; 54.3 minutes for an average prostate volume of 31.2 &#177; 9.76 ml [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref34">34</xref>] , others mention a resection time less than 70 minutes) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref25">25</xref>] . Because of the absence of TURP syndrome in Bipolar TURP, the resection time for large prostates can be extended beyond 60 minutes. This resection time depends on the volume of the prostate, the learning curve of the surgeon, the expertise of the operator as well as the available materials.</p><p>The average length of hospital stay of patients was 2.4 days (80%) (Ranges: 3 - 7) in 6%. This postoperative hospital stay confirms the results obtained by other authors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref34">34</xref>] . In Africa, two studies, respectively in Senegal and in Egypt (large BPH) found 2.8 days of hospital stay (Ranges: 3 - 12) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref26">26</xref>] . The postoperative delay of the hospital stay is closely related to complications. The majority of our patients (75%) did not have postoperative complications (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>). Their quality of life was significantly improved (IPSS and Qmax) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table7">Table 7</xref>). These results are similar to those in the literature [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref25">25</xref>] .</p><p>Urinary incontinence and hemorrhage were the most frequent complications; 7.2% and 6.6% respectively. 7 patients (4.6%) were transfused. Most of the complications were Grade 1 (11.8%). 2% of patients had major complications according to the Clavien Dindo classification (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>). Some authors report similar complications including the transfusion rate (1% - 3%) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref35">35</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref36">36</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref37">37</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref38">38</xref>] . In our series, transfusion rate was more observed at the beginning of learning the procedure of resection. The mortality rate in this series was 2.6% (4 patients). These results differ from those of other authors who report mortality rates of 0.6% and 1% respectively [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref35">35</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref39">39</xref>] .</p><p>70% of patients had the IPSS with severe symptoms and bother QOL preoperatively; 74% of the patients improved their IPSS and QOL three months postoperatively (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref>). The improvement in quality of life depended on the severity of the symptoms; faster for mild and moderate symptoms, and slows for severe symptoms (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table7">Table 7</xref>). Many authors who have evaluated the severity of symptoms and the quality of life of patients before and after bipolar TURP report similar results [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref21">21</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref34">34</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref40">40</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref41">41</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.129713-ref42">42</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>Although open adenomectomy is a standard surgical treatment of large BPH in conventional surgery, the progress of minimally invasive surgery mainly Bipolar TURP confers many advantages such as; the low rate of complications, reduced length of hospital stay and improvement in the patient’s quality of life. The results of the current study on the resection of large adenomas, as well as those of other authors encourage practitioners to extend the indication of Bipolar TURP to large BPH (&gt;80 ml).</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Limitations of This Study</title><p>The current study could not be extended to general population of Kinshasa because of its small sample size and a short study period, but furthermore, it provided us with satisfactory and useful data for our daily practice.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Strength of the Study</title><p>This study analyzed the issue of patients under TURP procedure without randomized clinical trials. It was a quick and less expensive, helping us to assess the quality of life (QOL) of our patients. The final results were comparable with those of other authors.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Contribution of the Authors</title><p>Dr Mazoba Tacite contributed to the processing and statistical analysis of the data.</p><p>Other authors participated in the selection of patients, surgical procedure and correction of the article.</p></sec><sec id="s9"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest in relation to this article.</p></sec><sec id="s10"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Molamba, D.M., Koseka, R.D., Tsita, A.M., Mukaz, P.M., Konga, J.L., Kemfuni, T.M., Kpanya, T.M., Mazango, P.E.M., Pablo, D.N., Nkumu, M.L., Massamba, B.L., Lolangwa, F.B. and Maole, A.P. (2023) Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (B-TURP) Including Large Prostate Glands in Kinshasa, DR Congo. Open Journal of Urology, 13, 530-546. https://doi.org/10.4236/oju.2023.1312059</p></sec><sec id="s11"><title>NOTES</title></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.129713-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yee, C.H., Wong, J.H.M., Chiu, P.K.F., Teoh, J.Y.C., Chan, C.K., Chan, E.S.Y., Hou, S.M. and Ng, C.F. (2016) Secondary Hemorrhage after Bipolar Transurethral Resection and Vaporization of Prostate. Urology Annals, 8, 458-463. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.192110</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Coyne, K.S., Sexton, C.C., Thompson, C.L., Milsom, I., Irwin, D., Kopp, Z.S., et al. (2009) The Burden of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: Evaluating the Effect of LUTS on Health-Related Quality of Life, Anxiety and Depression: EpiLUTS. BJU International, 103, 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08371.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Michalak, J., Tzou, D. and Funk, J. (2015) HoLEP: The Gold Standard for the Surgical Management of BPH in the 21st Century. American Journal of Clinical and Experimental Urology, 3, 36-42.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yee, C.H., Li, J.K., Lam, H.C., Chan, E.S., Hou, S.S. and Ng, C.F. (2014) The Prevalence of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in a Chinese Population, and the Correlation with Uroflowmetry and Disease Perception. International Urology and Nephrology, 46, 703-710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-013-0586-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Réassimiler, J., Teber, D., Kuntz, R. and Hofmann, R. (2006) Complications of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP)—Incidence, Management, and Prevention. European Urology, 50, 969-979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.042</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hahn, R.G. (2006) Fluid Absorption in Endoscopic Surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 96, 8-20. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aei279</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hawary, A., Mukhtar, K., Sinclair, A. and Pearce, I. (2009) Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Syndrome: Almost Gone But Not Forgotten. Journal of Endourology, 23, 2013-2020. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.0129</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gratzke, C., Bachmann, A., Descazeaud, A., Drake, M.J., Madersbacher, S., Mamoulakis, C., et al. (2015) EAU Guidelines on the Assessment of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Including Benign Prostatic Obstruction. European Urology, 67, 1099-1109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.038</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abdallah, M.M. and Badreldin, M.O. (2014) A Short-Term Evaluation of the Safety and the Efficacy of Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in Patients with a Large Prostate (&gt; 90 g). Arab Journal of Urology, 12, 251-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2014.10.003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lin, Y.H., Hou, C.P., et al. (2018) Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Provides More Favorable Clinical Outcomes Compared with Conservative Medical Treatment in Patients with Urinary Retention Caused by Benign Prostatic Obstruction. BMC Geriatrics, 18, Article No. 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-018-0709-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Issa, M.M., Young, M.R., Bullock, A.R., Bouet, R. and Petros, S.A. (2004) Dilutional Hyponatremia of TURP Syndrome: A Historical Event in the 21st Century. Urology, 64, 298-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2004.03.023</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Horninger, W., Unterlechner, H., Strasser, H. and Bartsch, G. (1996) Transurethral Prostatectomy: Mortality and Morbidity. The Prostate, 28, 195-200. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0045(199603)28:3&lt;195::AID-PROS6&gt;3.0.CO;2-E</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chen, Y.T., Hou, C.P., Juang, H.H., Lin, Y.H., Yang, P.S., Chang, P.L., Chen, C.L., Weng, S.C. and Tsui, K.H. (2022) Comparison of Outcome and Quality of Life between Thulium Laser (Vela&lt;sup&gt;TM&lt;/sup&gt; XL) Enucleation of Prostate and Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate (B-TUEP). Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, 18, 145-154. https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S352583</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Adakal, O., Rouga, M.M., Abdoulaye, M.B., Adamou, H., Maikassoua, M., Mounkeila, I., James Didier, L., Magagi, I.A., Roua, A., Halidou, M., Habou, O. and Sani, R. (2021) Hypertrophie Bénigne de la Prostate au Centre Hospitalier Régional de Maradi: Aspects Cliniques, Thérapeutiques et Pronostiques. Health Science and Disease, 22, 93-97.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tsita, A.M., Molamba, D.M., Mpenda, G.M., Kuntima, P.D., Maole, A.P., Lwankandi, S.L., Katonkola, J.K., Natuhoyila, A.N. and Nkumu, M.L. (2020) Evaluation of Quality of Life after a Transuretral Resection of the Prostate at Pointe-à-Pitre Clinic. International Journal of Surgery Science, 4, 144-150. https://doi.org/10.33545/surgery.2020.v4.i3c.482</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Aechambaud, J.P. and Leriche, A. La dysurie. Conduite pratique du diagnostic. In La Paraplégie, Maury M., Flammarion, 1981; 229-278.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fournier, G., Perrouin-Verbe, M.A., Papin, G. and Deruelle, C. Intérêt du contr&amp;#244;le échographique endorectal en temps réel dans le traitement de l’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate par vaporisation Laser Greenlight&amp;#174; XPS (180 W) [Usefulness of Real Time Transrectal Ultrasonography to Monitor the Greenlight XPS&amp;#174; (180 W) Laser Prostatectomy]. Progrès en Urologie, 21, 383-386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2010.12.002</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bah, I., Bah, M.B., et al. (2020) Adénomectomie Prostatique Transvésicale: Résultats et Complications au Service d’Urologie Andrologie de l’H&amp;#244;pital Ignace Deen, CHU de Conakry. Health Science Disease, 21, 55-59.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Moningo, D., Brureau, L., Emeville, E., Ferdinand, S., Punga, A., Lufuma, S., Blanchet, P., Romana, M. and Multigner, L. (2016) Polymorphisms of Estrogen Metabolism Related Genes and Prostate Cancer Risk in Two Populations of African Ancestry. PLOS ONE, 11, e0153609. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153609</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mubenga, L.M., Burume, A., Chimanuka, D.M., Muhindo, L. and De Groote, P. (2018) Résection Trans-urétrale de la Prostate: Première expérience à Bukavu, RD Congo. Anales Africaines de Médecine, 11, e2890.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bagayogo, N., et al. (2021) Hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate (HBP) géante: Aspects épidémiologiques, cliniques et thérapeutiques. Journal Africain d’Urologie, 27, 49-55. https://doi.org/10.21608/afju.2021.9359</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mishra, P.P., Prakash, V., Singh, K., Mog, H. and Agarwal, S. (2016) Bacteriological Profile of Isolates from Urine Samples in Patients of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and or Prostatitis Showing Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 10, DC16-DC18. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/21973.8734</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Edén, C.S., Jodal, U., Hanson, L.A., Lindberg, U. and &amp;#197;kerlund, A.S. (1976) Variable Adherence to Normal Human Urinary-Tract Epithelial Cells of Escherichia Coli Strains Associated with Various Forms of Urinary-Tract Infection. The Lancet, 308, 490-492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(76)90788-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Treharne, C., Crowe, L., Booth, D. and Ihara, Z. (2018) Economic Value of the Transurethral Resection in Saline System for Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in England and Wales: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Cost-Consequence Model. European Urology Focus, 4, 270-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2016.03.002</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sood, R., Manasa, T., Goel, H., Singh, R.K., Singh, R., Khattar, N. and Pandey, P. (2017) Day Care Bipolar Transurethral Resection vs Photoselective Vaporisation under Analgesia: A Prospective, Randomised Study of the Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Arab Journal of Urology, 15, 331-338.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Luhiriri, N.D. and Ahuka, O.L. (2016) Prise En Charge Diagnostique Et Chirurgicale De L’hypertrophie Benigne De La Prostate A l’h&amp;#244;pital De Panzi—République Démocratique Du Congo. Journal of West African Urology and Andrology Conference, 1, 289-293.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zeng, Q.S., Zhao, Y.B., Wang, B.Q., Ying, M. and Hu, W.L. (2017) Minimally Invasive Simple Prostatectomy for a Case of Giant Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Asian Journal of Andrology, 19, 717-718. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.185851</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yun, H.K., Kwon, J.B., Cho, S.R. and Kim, J.S. (2010) Early Experience with Laparoscopic Retropubic Simple Prostatectomy in Patients with Voluminous Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). Korean Journal of Urology, 51, 323-329. https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2010.51.5.323</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Learney, R.M., Malde, S., Downes, M. and Shrotri, N. (2013) Successful Minimally Invasive Management of a Case of Giant Prostatic Hypertrophy Associated with Recurrent Nephrogenic Adenoma of the Prostate. BMC Urology, 13, Article No. 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2490-13-18</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Aigbe, E. (2022) Relationship between Prostate Volume, Age and Body Mass Index among Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in the Niger Delta Region, Nigeria. African Urology, 2, 32-34. https://doi.org/10.36303/AUJ.2022.2.1.0026</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gravas, S., Bach, T., Bachmann, A., et al. (2015) EAU Guidelines on the Assessment of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms including Benign Prostatic Obstruction. European Urology, 67, 1099-1109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.038</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Descazeaud, A., et al. (2012) Bilan initial, suivi et traitement des troubles mictionnels en rapport avec hyperplasie bénigne de prostate: Recommandations du CTMH de l’AFU [Initial Assessment, Follow-up and Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Related to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Guidelines of the LUTS Committee of the French Urological Association]. Progrès en Urologie, 22, 977-988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.purol.2012.10.001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Xie, L.P., et al. (2015) Interval from Transurethral Resection of Prostate to Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Does Not Affect Outcomes for Incidental Prostate Cancer. Urology Journal, 12, 2154-2159.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yee, C.H., Wong, J.H.M., Chiu, P.K.F., Teoh, J.Y.C., Chan, C.K., Chan, E.S.Y., Hou, S.M. and Ng, C.F. (2016) Secondary Hemorrhage after Bipolar Transurethral Resection and Vaporization of Prostate. Urology Annals, 8, 458-463. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.192110</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ndiath, A., et al. 2021) Morbi-mortalité de la résection trans-urétrale bipolaire de la prostate au Service d’Urologie-Andrologie de l’H&amp;#244;pital Aristide Le Dantec de Dakar. PAMJ-Clinical Medicine, 5, Article 75. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj-cm.2021.5.75.27226</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Descazeaud, A., Robert, G., Lebdai, S., et al. (2011) Impact of Oral Anticoagulation on Morbidity of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate. World Journal of Urology, 29, 211-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-010-0561-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Reich, O., Gratzke, C., Bachmann, A., et al. (2008) Morbidity, Mortality and Early Outcome of Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: A Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of 10,654 Patients. The Journal of Urology, 180, 246-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.058</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hawary, A., Mukhtar, K., Sinclair, A. and Pearce, I. (2009) Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Syndrome: Almost Gone but Not Forgotten. Journal of Endourology, 23, 2013-2020. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.0129</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Evrard, P.L., Mongiat-Artus, P. and Desgrandchamps, F. (2017) Morbi-mortalité de la résection trans-urétrale de la prostate par courant monopolaire chez les patients &amp;#226;gés de 75 ans et plus. Progrès en Urologie, 27, 312-318.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Flam, T. and Montauban, V. (2003) Dépistage de l’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate en Médecine générale: Enquête sur 18540 hommes. Progrès en Urologie, 13, 416-424.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wong, C.K.H., Choi, E.P.H., and Chan, S.W.H. (2017) Use of International Prostate Symptom Score in Chinese Male Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. The Aging Male, 20, 241-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/13685538.2017.1362380</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.129713-ref42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wong, S.Y., Woo, J., Hong, A., et al. (2006) Risk Factors for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Southern Chinese Men. Urology, 68, 1009-1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2006.05.039</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>