| dc.contributor.author | Henkel, Ralf | |
| dc.contributor.author | Cho, Chaklam | |
| dc.contributor.author | Teoh, Jeremy Yuen Chun | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-01-06T06:58:15Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2021-01-06T06:58:15Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Henkel, R. et al. (2020). Quest for the best—a move to anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate. Andrologia ,52(8),e13757 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1439-0271 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | 10.1111/and.13757 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10566/5567 | |
| dc.description.abstract | The history of surgical enucleation for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms caused by benign prostatic enlargement dates back more than 100 years (Freyer, 1919). Open prostatec-tomy (OP) is an invasive procedure associated with high transfu-sion rates, long catheterisation time, and long hospital stay in spite of its capability to achieve complete removal of prostatic adenoma. As a result, the popularity of OP has declined after the advent of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). It is not surprising that TURP has been considered the standard surgical therapy to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) for decades in view of its favourable safety profile and minimally invasive nature. | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Wiley-Blackwell | en_US |
| dc.subject | Enucleation | en_US |
| dc.subject | Prostate | en_US |
| dc.subject | Patient safety | en_US |
| dc.subject | Prostate surgery | en_US |
| dc.subject | Prostate adenoma | en_US |
| dc.title | Quest for the best—a move to anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |
