Urology
Volume 64, Issue 2 , Pages 298-301 , August 2004

Dilutional hyponatremia of TURP syndrome: A historical event in the 21st century

  • Muta M Issa

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Decatur, Georgia, USA
    • Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Muta M. Issa, M.D., M.B.A., Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, 1365 Clifton Road Northeast, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
    • ,
  • Mark R Young

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Decatur, Georgia, USA
    • Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    • ,
  • Andrew R Bullock

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Decatur, Georgia, USA
    • Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    • ,
  • Rafael Bouet

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Decatur, Georgia, USA
    • Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    • ,
  • John A Petros

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Decatur, Georgia, USA
    • Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA

Received 5 February 2004 ,Accepted 11 March 2004.

References 

  1. Issa MM, and Marshall FF: Contemporary Diagnosis and Management of Diseases of the Prostate, 2nd ed. Newton, Pennsylvania, Handbook in Health Care Co., 2004, pp 13–14
  2. Littlejohn JO, Ghafar MA, Kang YM, et al.  Transurethral resection of the prostate (the new old standard). Curr Opin Urol. 2002;12:19–23
  3. Hultén JO. How to master absorption during transurethral resection of the prostate (basic measures guided by the ethanol method). BJU Int. 2002;90:244–247
  4. Mebust WK, Holtgrewe HL, Cockett ATK, et al.  Transurethral prostatectomy (immediate and postoperative complications—cooperative study of 13 participating institutions evaluating 3885 patients). J Urol. 1989;141:243–247
  5. Borboroglu PG, Kane CJ, Ward JF, et al.  Immediate and postoperative complications of transurethral prostatectomy in the 1990s. J Urol. 1999;162:1307–1310
  6. Malhotra V. Transurethral resection of the prostate. Anesth Clin North Am. 2000;18:883–897
  7. Botto H, Lebret T, Barré P, et al.  Electrovaporization of the prostate with the Gyrus device. J Endourol. 2001;15:313–316
  8. Madsen PO, Naber KG. The importance of the pressure in the prostatic fossa and absorption of irrigating fluid during transurethral resection of the prostate. J Urol. 1973;109:446–452
  9. Heidler H. Frequency and causes of fluid absorption (a comparison of three techniques for resection of the prostate under continuous pressure monitoring). BJU Int. 1999;83:619–622
  10. Sharma DP, Harvey AB. Does intraprostatic vasopressin prevent the transurethral resection syndrome?. BJU Int. 2000;86:223–226
  11. Moy ML, Burke M, Strup SE. Histologic effects of the Gyrus resection system versus standard electrocautery resection in the treatment of bladder tumors. J Endourol. 2001;15(suppl 1):A63
  12. Ruiz-Deya G, Hellstrom W, Thomas R. Minimally invasive treatment of BPH using a novel electrocautery system (Gyrus) (a retrospective financial analysis versus standard monopolar resection). J Endourol. 2002;16(suppl 1):A25

PII: S0090-4295(04)00340-1

doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.03.023

Urology
Volume 64, Issue 2 , Pages 298-301 , August 2004

Article Tools