ABSTRACT Objectives: Surgical treatment is indicated in patients where medical therapy fails to prove beneficial or in patients who develop complications related with bladder outlet obstruction. In our study, we developed a new surgical technique which can be defined as Transvesical Resection of Prostate (TVRP) without using the urethra. This method was previously described in our articles (1). Materials and Methods: A 62-years-old male patient, using an alpha blocker agent for 5 years, reported increased discomfort with urination. His findings were as follows: PSA: 1.2 ng/dL, prostate volume: 45 cc, digital rectal examination: benign, IPSS: 30, QoL: 5, Qmax: 6, urine volume: 225 cc, post-mictional residue: 65 cc. Eventually the patient was informed and prostate resection decision was made. Results: Suprapubic catheter was removed 1 day after surgery and the patient was discharged. Urethral catheter was removed 4 days after urine output became clear. No complications developed after the operation. At postoperative 1st month, Qmax was 22, urine volume was 260 cc, post-mictional residue was 40 cc, IPSS was 8, QoL was 1, and the pathology was benign prostate tissue. Conclusions: Urethral stricture is one of the most important postoperative complications of TURP. The incidence of urethral stricture is reported between 2.2% and 9.8% in different series (2–5). In this technique which we developed, urethra is not used and prostate is removed through the bladder, similar to open prostatectomies. For this reason, we suggest that it has an advantage over TURP, regarding urethral stricture development.

ABSTRACT Objective: To protect the urethra from instrumentation related urethra injures and stricture, we developed a new surgical technique which can be defined as transvesical resection of prostate without using urethra. Materials and Methods: Our study included 12 consecutive bladder outlet obstruction patients treated with transvesical prostate resection in our clinic between March 2016 and May 2016. Detailed anamnesis, results of physical examination, digital rectal examination, routine lab tests, international prostate symptoms score, transrectal ultrasound, measurement of prostate-specific antigen levels and uroflowmetry was performed in all patients prior to surgery. Results: Hospitalization period following surgery was 1 day. Foley catheter and suprapubic cystostomy catheters were removed in a median period of 3.6 days and 1 day. Median mass of resected adenomas was measured as 21.8 gr. Median maximum flow rate was measured as 6mL/s. Median postvoid residual urine volume was 70.6 cc and median international prostate symptoms score and quality of life scores were 9 and 1.4, respectively. Conclusion: In this study, we would like to show the possible practicality of transvesical resection of prostate technique in this patient group. However, we think that this technique is very useful in special patient groups such as patients with bladder stones, priapism and penile prosthesis.

ABSTRACT Objective To The standard technique for obtaining a histologic diagnosis of prostatic carcinomas is transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. Acute prostatitis which might develop after prostate biopsy can cause periprostatic inflammation and fibrosis. In this study, we performed a retrospective review of our database to determine whether ABP history might affect the outcome of RP. Materials and Methods 441 RP patients who were operated in our clinic from 2002 to 2014 were included in our study group. All patients’ demographic values, PSA levels, biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen pathology results and their perioperative/ postoperative complications were evaluated. Results There were 41 patients in patients with acute prostatitis following biopsy and 397 patients that did not develop acute prostatitis. Mean blood loss, transfusion rate and operation period were found to be significantly higher in ABP patients. Hospitalization period and reoperation rates were similar in both groups. However, post-op complications were significantly higher in ABP group. Conclusion Even though it does not affect oncological outcomes, we would like to warn the surgeons for potential complaints during surgery in ABP patients.