<?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.2024.142004</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJU-131033</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>
 
 
  Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TRUP) for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) in Central Cote D’Ivoire: Indications and Results
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kouassi</surname><given-names>Patrice Avion</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>N’diamoi</surname><given-names>Akassimadou</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>Venance</surname><given-names>Alloka</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>Sadia</surname><given-names>Kamara</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>Koffi</surname><given-names>Dje</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Urology Department, Bouaké University Hospital, Bouaké, C&amp;amp;#244;te d’Ivoire</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>04</day><month>02</month><year>2024</year></pub-date><volume>14</volume><issue>02</issue><fpage>27</fpage><lpage>38</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>6,</day>	<month>July</month>	<year>2023</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>1,</day>	<month>February</month>	<year>2024</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>4,</day>	<month>February</month>	<year>2024</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>
 
 
  Background: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is defined histologically as adenomyofromatous hyperplasia of the transitional zone of the prostate. It remains the most common benign tumour in men over the age of 50, and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the surgical treatment of choice. 
  Objectives: To determine the indications and present our results of transurethral resection of the prostate. 
  Patients and Methods: After obtaining approval from the ethics committee of the private hospital and the university hospital of Bouak&#233; (C
  &amp;#244;te d’Ivoire), we conducted a cross-sectional study of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) between January 2021 and April 2023. All patients and their families were informed beforehand and had signed an informed consent form. All patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with ultrasound weight of less than 80 grams were included. The following parameters were studied: age, reason for consultation, ultrasound prostate weight of benign prostatic hyperplasia, indication for TURP, duration of operation, blood loss, duration of post-PRT urinary drainage, length of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality, and outcome.
   Results: 39 patients with a mean age of 58.3 years (57-77 years) underwent transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). TURP was indicated in 46.15% (n = 18) of cases of refractory acute urinary retention with failure of the urinary catheter removal test, 17.94% (n = 7) of cases of lower urinary tract disorders that were incapacitating despite treatment, 15.38% (n = 6) of cases of refractory or recurrent urinary tract infection, 10.25% (n = 4) of cases of failure of medical treatment and 10.25% (n = 4) of cases of iterative hematuria. The mean duration of TURP was 53.68 min (48-57), the mean weight of the resected prostate was 58.7 g (35 and 83 g), blood loss was minimal in 92.30% (n = 36), the mean duration of irrigation-washing was 2. 5 days (1-3 days), the mean time for urinary catheterisation was 2.45 days (3 and 4 days), 5.12% (n = 2) of patients presented complications such as hemorrhage compensated by a blood transfusion. One patient developed orchiepididymitis (2.56%). The average hospital stay was 3.75 days (3-5 days). Pathological examination was in favour of BPH in 92.3% (n = 36) and the coexistence of BPH and prostate adenocarcinoma in 7.69% (n = 3). The results of TURP were considered good in 94.87% (n = 37). Mortality was nil. 
  Conclusion: In view of our results, TURP is a reliable, elegant minimally invasive technique with low morbidity and mortality.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>BPH</kwd><kwd> TURP</kwd><kwd> Endo-Urology</kwd><kwd> Prostate</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is defined histologically as adenomyofromatous hyperplasia of the transitional zone of the prostate. It remains the most common benign tumour in men over the age of 50 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref1">1</xref>] . Its main risk factors are dihydrotestosterone (DHT), ageing and geographical location [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref2">2</xref>] . The circumstances in which it is discovered are many and varied but can be summed up as obstructive and irritative disorders of the lower urinary tract, progressive complications and chance discovery. Although it is a benign condition, it has been shown to have a negative impact on the patient’s health-related quality of life [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref3">3</xref>] . Initial treatment is conservative, using phytotherapy, alpha-blockers and 5-alpha reductase inhibitors as mono- or dual therapy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref3">3</xref>] . However, according to the 2021 American Urological Association guidelines, surgical treatment is recommended for patients with refractory urinary retention, renal insufficiency, recurrent hematuria, bladder stones, recurrent urinary tract infections, or failure of medical treatment.</p><p>Despite the ongoing development of new minimally invasive surgical methods, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the gold standard in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), with over 90% of patients returning to normal or improved voiding during the 10-year follow-up period [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref4">4</xref>] .</p><p>The aim of our study is to determine the indications for TURP and to present our results.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Patients and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Study Design and Approval</title><p>After obtaining approval from the ethics committee of the private hospital and the university hospital of Bouak&#233; (C&#244;te d’Ivoire), we conducted a cross-sectional study of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) between January 2021 and April 2023. All patients and their families were informed beforehand and had signed an informed consent form.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Inclusion and Non-Inclusion Criteria</title><p>All patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with an ultrasound weight of less than 80 grams were included. Patients with a prostate weight greater than 80 grams or with bladder lithiasis detected by ultrasound or cystoscopy were excluded from our series.</p><p>All TURP procedures were performed after a preoperative work-up including blood count, partial thromboplastin time (PTT), prothrombin rate (PRT), uremia, creatinemia, blood grouping and electrocardiogram. We ensured that the urine was sterile by means of Urine Cytobacteriological Examination (UCE) All patients underwent a pre-anaesthetic consultation to determine the route of anaesthesia. The various TURPs were performed by the same surgeon-urologist using a 26 CH sheath resection with 30˚ optics, a monopolar electric current and a continuous irrigation system using glycine with cutting/coagulation set at 130˚/70W. At the end of the procedure, the resected prostatic copal tissue is recovered using the Ellik bulb, weighed on a digital balance and fixed in formalin for anatomopathological examination. Bleeding areas were hemostasis using an electric ball and a dual-current DUFOUR catheter was inserted, the balloon of which was inflated to 30 ml for continuous bladder irrigation.</p><p>Data were collected using a survey form containing the parameters studied. Data were entered using Word software. Epi-info 7 software was used to analyse the data. The following parameters were studied: age, reason for consultation, ultrasound prostate weight for benign prostatic hyperplasia, indication for TURP, and duration of blood loss. The duration of urinary drainage after TURP, the length of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality, and the outcome.</p><p>Thus,</p><p>• Operative time was calculated as the time elapsed between the introduction of the resection and placement of the dual-stream Dufour catheter.</p><p>• The proportion of the prostate resected was calculated as the ratio of the volume resected to the volume of the prostate ultrasound pre-operatively.</p><p>• Blood loss was calculated as the difference between the preoperative and postoperative haemoglobin levels on Day 1, i.e. 24 hours after TURP.</p><p>Also, the results of TURP were judged to be good, fair, or poor 90 days after the operation, when the patient was seen at the second postoperative appointment.</p><p>• Good results:</p><p>- Clinical sign = 00;</p><p>- Prostate size &lt; 20 g;</p><p>- Post-void residue &lt; 10 ml.</p><p>• Average results: - weight &lt; 20 g:</p><p>- Post Micturition Residue &lt; 10 ml;</p><p>- Mild discomfort.</p><p>• Poor results:</p><p>- Persistence of symptoms;</p><p>- Post Micturition Residue = 50 ml;</p><p>- Prostate weight = 25 g.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Epidemiological Data</title><p>➢ Age</p><p>The mean age of the patients was 58.3 years, ranging from 57 to 77 years.</p><p>➢ Occupation</p><p>Farmers were the most represented with 46.15% (n = 18).</p><p>➢ Ethnicity</p><p>Baoul&#233; was the dominant ethnic group with 53.84% (n = 21).</p><p>➢ Marital status</p><p>Cohabiting patients were more common at 46.15% (n = 18).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Clinical Data</title><sec id="s3_2_1"><title>3.2.1. Mode of Admission</title><p>74.35% of patients were self-referred (n = 29).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_2"><title>3.2.2. Reason for Consultation</title><p>Acute retention of urine was the most frequent reason for consultation with 46.15% (n = 18) followed by dysuria 30.76% (n = 12). (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>)</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_3"><title>3.2.3. Progression Time</title><p>43.58% (n = 17) of patients consulted between 6 and 1 year after the onset of symptoms.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_4"><title>3.2.4. Comorbidity and History</title><p>79.48% of patients had no comorbidity (n = 31).</p><p>• Surgical history</p><p>38.46% of patients had undergone a hernia repair (n = 15).</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Breakdown of patients by reasons for consultation</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >REASONS FOR CONSULTATION</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >NUMBERS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >PERCENTAGE %</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Dysuria</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30.76</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pollakiuria (PKU)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.69</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urinary burning</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.56</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Haematuria</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Acute retention of urine (ARU)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.15</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urinary urgency</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.56</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TOTAL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>• Urological history</p><p>10.25% (n = 4) of patients were being monitored for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_5"><title>3.2.5. Physical Signs</title><p>46.15% (n = 18) of patients presented with a bladder globe. A trans-urethral urinary catheter was inserted urgently to drain the urine in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_6"><title>3.2.6. Rectal Examination Results</title><p>All the patients had the characteristics of benign prostatic hypertrophy on rectal examination. The prostate was enlarged, with a smooth surface and an elastic consistency with loss of the median sulcus.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_7"><title>3.2.7. Estimated Prostate Weight on Digital Rectal Examination</title><p>The average weight of the prostate on digital rectal examination was 70 g with extremes of 40 and 100 g.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Paraclinical Data</title><sec id="s3_3_1"><title>3.3.1. Vesico-Prostatic and Renal Ultrasonography</title><p>• Prostate weight</p><p>The mean ultrasound weight of the prostate was 67.5 g with extremes of 47 and 93 g.</p><p>• Post-void residue</p><p>The mean post-void residue was 176 ml with extremes of 70 ml and 307 ml.</p><p>• Impact on the bladder and upper urinary tract.</p><p>28.20% (n = 11) of patients had an impact on the bladder and upper urinary tract, <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>.</p></sec><sec id="s3_3_2"><title>3.3.2. Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA)</title><p>The mean PSA level was 2.1 ng/ml with extremes of 0.56 and 9.5 ng/ml. All patients with a PSA greater than 4 ng/ml underwent prostate biopsy plus anatomopathological examination, which excluded prostate adenocarcinoma.</p></sec><sec id="s3_3_3"><title>3.3.3. Renal Work-Up</title><p>07.69% (n = 3) of patients had obstructive renal failure. Patients underwent urinary catheterisation for urine drainage. Regular monitoring of renal function was performed for 45 days until renal function returned to normal.</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients according to physical signs</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >PHYSICAL SIGNS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >NUMBERS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >PERCENTAGE (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Oedema of the lower limbs</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.20</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder globe</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.15</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Inguinal swelling</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.69</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Scrotal swelling</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.94</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TOTAL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</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 patients according to impact on the bladder and upper urinary tract</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >BLADDER IMPACTS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >NUMBERS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >PERCENTAGE %</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urethro hydronephrosis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.94</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder lithiasis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >00</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder diverticulum</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No repercussions</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >71.79</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TOTAL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s3_3_4"><title>3.3.4. Urine Cytobacteriological Examination (UCE)</title><p>E. coli was the germ most frequently encountered, accounting for 30.76% (n = 12). These patients were treated with antibiotics for 14 to 21 days. Urine was sterile at the last check after antibiotic treatment in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3_4"><title>3.4. Progressive Complications</title><p>92.30% (n = 36) of patients had progressive complications of BPH in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5"><title>3.5. Therapeutic Data</title><sec id="s3_5_1"><title>3.5.1. Indication</title><p>In 46.15% (n = 18) of cases, TURP was indicated for refractory acute urinary retention (AUR) with failure to remove the urinary catheter in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref>.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_2"><title>3.5.2. Duration of the Procedure</title><p>The average duration of TURP was 53.68 minutes, with extremes of 48 and 57 minutes.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_3"><title>3.5.3. Average Weight of Prostate Resected</title><p>The average weight of the resected prostate was 58.7 g with extremes of 35 and 83.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_4"><title>3.5.4. Blood Loss</title><p>Blood loss was minimal in the majority of patients 92.30% (n = 36). However, three patients had significant blood loss (7.69%) requiring compensation by blood transfusion.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_5"><title>3.5.5. Time of Bladder Lavage Irrigation</title><p>The average duration of bladder irrigation-washing was 2.5 days, with extremes of 1 and 3 days.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_6"><title>3.5.6. Time to Urinary Drainage Post TURP</title><p>The mean time for urinary catheterisation was 2.5 days, with extremes of 3 and 4 days.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_7"><title>3.5.7. Complications</title><p>5.12% (n = 2) of patients presented with a complication of haemorrhage due to escars falling.</p><p>2.56% (n = 1) presented with orchiepididymitis.</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of Patients according to Urine Cytobacteriological Examination (UCE) result</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >URINE CYTOBACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION (UCE)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >NUMBERS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >PERCENTAGE %</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Klebsiella pneumonia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.69</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Escherichia coli</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30.76</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Proteus mirubis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.12</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Psudomonas aeroginosa</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.56</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Serratia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.12</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sterile urine</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >48.71</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TOTAL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients according to progressive complications</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >COMPLICATIONS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >NUMBERS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >POURCENTAGE %</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Haematuria</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >AUR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.15</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Uretro hydronephrosis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.94</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bladder diverticulum</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Renal insufficiency</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.69</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No complications</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.69</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TOTAL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table6" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients according to indication for TURP</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >INDICATIONS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >NUMBERS</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >PERCENTAGE %</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Iterative haematuria</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Failure of the AUR test refractions of catheter removal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.15</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Failure of medical treatment</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.25</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Refractory or recurrent urinary tract infection</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.38</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TUBA is invalid under medical treatment</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.94</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TOTAL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s3_5_8"><title>3.5.8. Length of Hospital Stay</title><p>The average length of stay was 3.75 days, with extremes of 3 and 5 days.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_9"><title>3.5.9. Pathological Findings</title><p>Pathological findings were consistent with adenomyofribroma of the prostate in 92.3% (n = 36). 7.69% (n = 3) had BPH + Adenocarcinoma of the prostate associated with benign prostatic hypertrophy cohabitation.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_10"><title>3.5.10. Result Assessment</title><p>The result was considered good in 94.87% (n = 37).</p><p>In 5.12% (n = 2), the result was judged to be poor. These two patients benefited from a second TURP and presented a good result after the second TURP.</p></sec><sec id="s3_5_11"><title>3.5.11. Mortality</title><p>Mortality was nil in our series.</p></sec></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the cornerstone of surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) weighing less than or equal to 80 g, and with improving surgical skill and technology, TURP is also being used in patients with larger prostates and is as safe and effective in small as in large prostates [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref6">6</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref7">7</xref>] . Trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is not only the current standard surgical method but often the preferred surgical method for benign prostatic hyperplasia [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref5">5</xref>] . In the present study, we analysed both the indications and results of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In this study, we showed that TURP was indicated mainly for acute urinary retention with failure of the urinary catheter removal test in 46.15%, lower urinary tract disorders that were invalid despite medical treatment in 17.94%, refractory or recurrent urinary tract infection in 10.38%, failure of medical treatment in 10.25% and recurrent hematuria in 10.25%.</p><p>Our results are in line with the results of studies previously published in the literature showing that recourse to surgery for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia is only decided if the patient presents progressive complications of the pathology [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref8">8</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref10">10</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref11">11</xref>] . The indications for transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the present study are in line with the recommendations of the American Urological Association in 2021. For this institution, surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia is recommended for patients with refractory urinary retention with inability to wean from the urinary catheter, renal failure, recurrent microscopic haematuria, bladder stones and recurrent urinary infarction [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref12">12</xref>] . However, in 2021, ZHU [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref13">13</xref>] reported in his study carried out in CHINA indications for TURP in patients refusing drug treatment.</p><p>The mean duration of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the present study was 53.68 minutes. Resection time has evolved considerably and has also improved in relation to publications dating from 1990 to 2010. The mean resection time in 1990 was 26.2 minutes. It increased to 32.1 minutes in 2000, but then fell to 30.3 minutes in 2010 according to YOUG in his study on the evolution of prostate transurethral resection [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref14">14</xref>] . However, DIAKITE [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref15">15</xref>] reported an average duration of 40 minutes in MALI. These different times confirm the thesis that transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is a minimally invasive technique renowned for its short operative time.</p><p>Blood loss in our study was minimal in 92.30% of patients. However, 7.69% of patients had significant blood loss requiring blood transfusion. This rate is higher than those reported by GEREMEW [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref16">16</xref>] and DUTT KANT [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref17">17</xref>] . This result observed in the present study could be explained by the significant prostatic weight resected in these patients.</p><p>The mean duration of bladder irrigation-washing in our series was 2.5 days, which is longer than that reported by DIAKITE in MALI who reported 36 hours [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref15">15</xref>] . This duration is explained by the surgeon’s caution.</p><p>The average duration of the urinary catheter was 2.45 days in our series. This result is lower than that reported by DIAKITE in MALI, who reported an average duration of 3 days [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref15">15</xref>] . In the series by MAMOULAKIS [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref18">18</xref>] , this period ranged from 18.4 to 96 hours. According to some authors in the literature, this time may be related to the weight of the prostate that has been resected and the colour of the urine after irrigation has been stopped [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref19">19</xref>] .</p><p>The complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) are well-known in the literature. They include hemorrhage, blood clot retention, urinary tract infection, urethral stricture, secondary sclerosis of the bladder neck and retrograde ejaculation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref2">2</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref7">7</xref>] . Other rare complications include stroke, recto urethral fistula and bladder explosion [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref20">20</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref21">21</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref22">22</xref>] . In our series, we recorded 5.12% of complications. This result is in line with those reported by other authors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref15">15</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref16">16</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref17">17</xref>] . This confirms that transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is a technique with few complications.</p><p>In the present study, the average hospital stay was 3.75 days, compared with 6 days in the study by LOTTERSTATTER [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref8">8</xref>] and 2.1 days for GEREMEW [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref16">16</xref>] . This short hospital stay reflects the elegance of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). It is a technique that allows patients to resume their activities quickly while reducing the convalescence period.</p><p>The results of trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) were considered good in the present study at 94.87%. This result is consistent with the success rates reported by various authors in the literature [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref8">8</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref10">10</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.131033-ref13">13</xref>] .</p><p>The strength of our study lies in its rigorous methodology, the first to our knowledge to be carried out in Bouak&#233; in central C&#244;te d’Ivoire. However, it does have its limitations. It is a cross-sectional and descriptive study, and the results therefore merit external validation with a larger, independent sample. It would be useful for future studies with a more significant sample to be carried out in order to assess the substance of our results.</p><p>However, we believe that these results are clinically relevant because of their strong characterization in a real-life context.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>The results of the present study have shed light on the various indications and outcomes of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Our findings confirm the delay in consulting patients in our practices with regard to the frequency of urinary retention with failure to wean the catheter, which accounts for the long evolution of benign prostatic hypertrophy. These results show that TURP is a safe, effective, and attractive surgical method with few complications. From now on, it should become the benchmark for surgical management of BPH in central C&#244;te d’Ivoire.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Financial Support</title><p>No financial support for this research.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Avion, K.P., Akassimadou, N., Alloka, V., Kamara, S. and Dje, K. (2024) Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TRUP) for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) in Central Cote D’Ivoire: Indications and Results. Open Journal of Urology, 14, 27-38. https://doi.org/10.4236/oju.2024.142004</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.131033-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bakayoko, N.A., Sine, B., Faye, M., Sarr, A., Thiam, A., Ndiaye, M., 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.131033-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Datt, U.K., Kumar, S., Doreinajan, L.N., Badhe, B.A. and Sing, S. (2021) Effet du finasteride préopératoire sur la perte de sang perioperatoire lors de la résection trans-uretrale de la prostate et sur la densité des micro-vaisseaux chez les patients atteints d’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate: Un essai contr&amp;#244;lé randomisé ouvert. Annales d’urologie, 13, 199-203.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tsu-Cheu, L., Pro-Chih, C., I-Hung, S., et al. (2022) Efficacité et innocuité de la méthode Sandwich chez les patients atteints d’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate: Résection trans-uretrale bipolaire avec vaporisation Greenlight. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 11, 1276-1279.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Liao, J., Zhong, X., Chen, M., Li, D., Tan, X., Gu, J., et al. (2019) La résection trans-uretrale de la prostate avec préservation du col vésical diminue l’éjaculation rétrograde post-opératoire. Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques, 14, 96-101.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Oelke, M., Bachmann, A., Descazeaud, A., Emberton, M., Gravas, S., Michel, M.C., et al. (2013) Lignes directives de EAU sur le traitement et le suivi des sympt&amp;#244;mes des voies urinaires inferieures masculines non neurogènes y compris l’obstruction bénigne de la prostate. European Urology, 6, 118-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.004</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Joshi, H.N., De Jong, I.J., Karmacharya, R.M., Shrestha, B. and Shrestha, R. (2014) Résultats de la résection trans-uretrale de la prostate dans l’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate comparant une taille de prostate de plus de 80 grammes à une petite taille de prostate inférieure à 80 grammes. Kathmandu University Medical Journal, 12, 163-167.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kamar, A., Vasudeva, P., Kumav, N., Nanda, B., Jha, S.K., Mohanty, N., et al. (2013) Une étude comparative prospective randomisée de la résection trans-uretrale de la prostate mono polaire et bipolaire et de la vaporisation photo sélective de la prostate chez les patients qui présentent une obstruction bénigne de la prostate: Une expérience de centre unique. Journal of Endourology, 27, 1245-1253.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lotterstatter, M., Sehlehner, S., Wimpissinger, F., Gombos, J., Bektic, J., Stolzlechner, P., et al. (2022) Résection trans-uretrale de la prostate chez 85 patients: Une étude rétrospective multicentrique. Journal Mondial d’urologie, 40, 3015-3020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04179-w</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kouame, B., Ndoye, M., Kourou, R.D., Mahamat, A., Jalloh, M., Migue, K., et al. (2017) Résection trans-uretrale de la prostate (RTUP): Indications et résultats à l’h&amp;#244;pital général de GRAND YOFF à propos de 145 cas. Revue Algérienne d’urologie, 9, 61-66.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hugo, O.A., Manuel, A.A., Roberto, M.E., Mario, I. and Alvaro, P.B. (2021) Une étude prospective randomisée comparant la Résection trans-uretrale de la prostate monopolaire de la prostate pour le traitement de l’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate: Efficacité, fonction sexuelle, qualité de vie et complications. International Brazilian Journal of Urology, 47, 131-144. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2019.0766</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Saddam, H., Mohannad, A.A. and Ahmadj, M. (2022) L’effet de Résection trans-uretrale de la prostate sur les fonctions érectiles et éjaculatoire chez les patients atteints d’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate. Urologie Internationales, 106, 997-1004.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lerner, L.B., McVary, K.T., Barry, M.J., Bixler, B.R., Dahm, P., Das, A.K., et al. (2021) Prise en charge des sympt&amp;#244;mes de voies urinaires inferieures attribués à l’hypertrophie bénigne de prostate: Directives AUA, partie II-Evaluation du traitement chirurgicaux. Journal of Urologie, 206, 818-826.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhu, D., Gao, J., Dou, X., Zhang, Y. and Zhang, X. (2021) Incidence et facteurs de risques opératoires, dépression chez les patients subissant une Résection trans-uretrale de la prostate pour hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate. International Journal of General Medicine, 14, 7961-7969.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Youg, M.J., Elmussareh, M., Morrison, T. and Wilson, J.R. (2018) L’évolution de la pratique de la Résection trans-uretrale de la prostate. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons, 100, 326-329.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Diakite, M., Berte, H.J.G., Diallo, M.S., Kambou, D., Danou, P., Diakite, A.S., et al. (2016) La résection endoscopique bipolaire: expérience du service d’urologie CHU du point G. Uro’Andro, 1, 264-268.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gersmew, M.L., Gelaw, A.S. and Releve, D.A. (2022) Evaluation des complications de la Résection trans-uretrale monopolaire de la prostate à l’aide des complications de CLAVIEN-DINDI Système de notation. Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences, 32, 605-612.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dutt, K.U., Sumil, K., Lalgudi, N.D., Bhawana, B. and Suresh, S. (2021) Effet du finasteride préopératoire sur la perte de sang perioperatoire lors de la résection trans-uretrale de la prostate et sur les vaisseaux chez les patients atteints d’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate: Un essai contr&amp;#244;lé randomisée ouvert. Annales d’Urologie, 13, 199-203.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mamoulakis, C., Ubbink, D.T. and De La Rosette, J. (2009) Bipolar versus Monopolar Trans Urethral Resection of the Prostate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Triads. European Urology, 56, 798-809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.06.037</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Singh, H., Sesai, M.R., Shrivastav, P. and Vani, K. (2006) Bipolar versus Monopolar Trans Urethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP): Incidence, Management, and Prévention. European Urology, 50, 969-980.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Maher, A.H., Muhamed, K.P., Mohammad, B.A., et al. (2022) Cerebrovascular Accident after Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: A Rare Complication. International Journal of Surgery Case Reports, 93, Article 106948, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210261222001948?via%3Dihub</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gayam, V., Amrendra, M., Pavani, G., Mazin, K., Bimav, S. and Archpal, G. (2018) Fistule recto-urétrale secondaire à une resection trans-uretrale de la prostate. Cureus, 10, 1-7.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.131033-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Anzaoui, E.J., Najib, A., Younes, E.H., Oumar, G., Driss, T., Mohammed, L., et al. (2013) L’explosion intra-vésicale au cours des procédures de resection endoscopique: Un incident dangereux qui peut être évité. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 7, 517-519. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.416</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>