Madersbacher S, Aliviziotisg, Nordling J. EAU 2004 guidelines on assessment, therapy and follow-up of men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (BPH guidelines). Eur Urol. 2004;547–54.
2.
Aua. Guideline on management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Chapter I: Diagnosis and treatment recommendation. J Urol. 2003;530–47.
3.
Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R. Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)-incidence , management, and prevention. Eur Urol. 2006;969–80.
4.
Tan A, Gilling P, Kennett K. A randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands (40-200 grams). J Urol. 2003;1270–4.
5.
Hryntschak T. Suprapubic transvesical prostatectomy with primary closure of the bladder; improved technic and latest results. J Int Coll Surg. 1951;366–8.
6.
Malament M. Maximal hemostasis in suprapubic prostatectomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1965;1307–12.
7.
Hodges C, Barry J. Suprapubic and retropubic prostatectomy for prostatic hyperplasia. Urol Clin North Am. 1975;49–67.
8.
Littlejohn J, Ghafer M, Kang Y. Transurethral resection of the prostate: the new old standard. Curr Opin Urol. 2002;19–23.
9.
Schatzl G, Madersbacher S, Djavan B. Two-year results of transurethral resection of the prostate versus for “less naive” treatment options. Eur Urol. 2000;695–701.
10.
Madesbacher S, Marberger M. Is transurethral resection of the prostate still justified? BJU Int. 1999;227–37.
11.
Horninger W, Unterlechner H, Strasser H. Transurethral prostatectomy: mortality and morbidity. Prostate. 1996;195–200.
12.
Mebust W, Holgrewe H, Cocket A. Transurethral prostatectomy: immediate and postoperative complications. J Urol. 1989;243–7.
13.
Talic R. Transurethral electrovaporisation -resection using “wing” cutting electrode: Preliminary results of safety and efficacy in the treatment of men with prostatic outflow obstruction. Urology. 1999;106–10.
14.
Gupta N, Doddamani D, Hemal A, A. Vapor resection: A good alternative to standard loop resection in the management of prostates > 40 cc. J Endourol. 2002;767–71.
15.
Gupta N, Siravamakrishna A, Kumar R, Dogra P, Seith A. Comparison of standard transurethral vapour resection and holmium enucleation of the prostate for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia of > 40 gr. BJU Int. 2006;85–9.
16.
Gupta N, Siguh A, Kumar R. Transurethral vapor resection of prostate is a good alternative for prostates > 70 g. J Endourol. 2006;(2):1543–6.
17.
Kuo R, Kim SC, Lingeman J, Paterson R, Watkins S, Simmons G, et al. holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP): The Methodist Hospital experience with greater than 75 gram enucleation. J Urol. 2003;149–52.
18.
Matlaga B, Sc K, Kuo R, Ligeman J. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for prostates > 125 ml. BJU Int. 2006;81–4.
19.
Gilling P, Kennet K, Fraundorfer M. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for glands larger than 100 g. An endourologic alternative to open prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2000;529–31.
20.
Tan A, Gilling P, Kennet K, Frampton C, Westenberg A, Fraundorfer M. A randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate with transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands ( 40 to 200 grams ). J Urol. 2003;1270–4.
21.
Tubaro A, Carter S, Hind A. A prospective study of the safety and efficacy of suprapubic transvesical prostatectomy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2001;172–6.
22.
Varvakis I, Kyriakakis Z, Delis A. Long-term results of open transvesical prostatectomy from contemporary series of patients. Urology. 2004;306–10.
Citation
Copyright
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
