DOI: 10.36347/sasjs

Pages: 96-100

Originally sterile water was used as irrigation fluid, but the TURP saline technique was newly introduced into our practice which necessitates repeated evaluation. To compare the newly implemented TURP saline with conventional TURP water as control group in term of management and outcome in patients with prostatic enlargement.Patient and methods: Hospital- based prospective cross-sectional study. The included 50 patients with prostatic enlargement treated with TURP normal saline and other control group which included 50 patients treated with TURP water. The mean of prostatic size in patients used normal saline (mean 77.28 ± 24.24) as irrigation fluid was greater than the mean of patients used water (mean 62.00± 35.22). Also in the operative time the difference was significant with P-vale (0.000), the normal saline group (mean 38.45±7.85) and water group (mean 29.69±12.76). The normal saline (mean 1±0.00) group stayed in the hospital less time than the water group (mean 3.34±1.32) with P-value (0.000).Intra-operative complications as severe hypotension didn’t occur neither in patients used normal saline nor in those who used water as irrigation fluids, urinary bladder perforation occurred in (2%) of the water group. Postoperatively, catheter block and infections occurred in (8%) and (2%) respectively in water group, but it did not occur in those who used normal saline. Blood transfusion was required in (14%) of patients who used water as irrigate. Bipolar transurethral resection of prostate (TURP saline) is clinically comparable to monopolar transurethral resection of prostate (TURP water) with an improved safety profile.