經尿道攝護腺氣化術是一項以外科方法治療良性攝護腺肥大的新手術，發展此手術是希望能降低因經尿道攝護腺切除術所引起之併發症。經尿道攝護腺氣化術的原理是當電流通過滾輪電極時，在滾輪電極與攝護腺組識的接觸面會產生極高的熱，進而將攝護腺組織氣化。為了評估以雙滾輸施行經尿道攝護腺氣化術的安全性及有效性，有七位有著攝護腺肥大症狀的病人進入了本篇的研究。他們的年齡從62到73歲，平均66.1歲，其中兩位的肛門指診及血清攝護腺特定抗原都是正常，另外兩位則是肛門指診及經直腸超音波檢查是正常，其餘三位是經直腸超音波攝護腺切片證實是良性攝護腺肥大。在術前每一位病人都測得尿流速，並且以美國泌尿科醫學會攝護腺肥大症狀評分表（AUA symptom score）來評估病人的症狀程度。經尿道攝護腺氣化術的手術時間從30到95分鐘，平均56.4分鐘。有三位病人接受術中全程的直腸溫度監測，最高溫從攝氏35.4到36.9度，平均36.1度。術中出血量極少，術後導尿管放置時數從8到43.5小時，平均22.6小時，住院天數則是從l 到3天，平均1.4天，所有病人在拔除導尿管後僅有輕微的解尿疼痛。術後兩個月的追蹤檢查，病人的美國泌尿科醫學會攝護腺肥大症狀評分、最大尿流速及平均尿流速分別從術前的19.3 ± 6.2、10.9 ± 2.4 及4.3 ±1.6進步為8.7 ± 6.0（p<0.05）、17.7± 6.7 ml/sec（p<0.05）及8.2 ± 4.1 ml/sec（p <0.05）。我們將這些病人與接受經尿道攝護腺切除術的病人相比較，結果發現兩組病人在美國泌尿科醫學會攝護腺肥大症狀評分、最大尿流速及平均尿流速的進步程度並沒有意義上的差別。從初步的結果，我們認為以雙滾輪施行經尿道攝護腺氣化術來治療良性攝護腺肥大是一個安全且有效的方法。

Transurethral vaporization of the prostate (TUVP) is a newly developed surgical alternative in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in order to minimize the morbidity of transurethral resection of the prostate (TIJRP). By using the electrical currency via a rolling electrode, extremely high temperature generated on the area where the electrode contacts and vaporizes the prostatic tissues. To evaluate the safety and the effectiveness of the TUVP with a double-bar electrode, 7 patients (mean age 66.1 years, range 62 - 73) with symptomatic BPH were enrolled into this study. Of them, 2 patients had normal digital rectal examination (DRE) and serum prostate specific antigen (PSA), 2 patients had normal DRE and normal trans rectal ultrasound (TRUS) image and the other 3 patients had BPH confirmed by TRUS guided biopsy. The uroflowmetry and AUA symptom scoring were obtained before the TUVP. The operative time varied from 30 to 95 minutes (mean 56.4). The rectal temperature was monitored during the whole course of the TUVP in 3 patients and showed that the highest rectal temperature ranged from 35.4 to 36.9°C (mean 36.1). Minimal blood loss was noted during the TUVP. Mean postoperative catheterization time was 22.6 hours (range 8 - 43.5). The postoperative hospital stay ranged between I and 3 days (mean 1.4). Only mild painful urination post catheter removal was experienced in all patients. The AUA symptom score, the maximum flow rate and the mean flow rate improved from 19.3 ± 6.2 to 8.7 ± 6.0 (p < 0.05), from 10.9 ± 2.4 to 17.7 ± 6.7 (p <0.05) and from 4.3 ± 1.6 to 8.2 ± 4.1 ml./sec. (p < 0.05) at 2-month followup, respectively. As comparing TUVP with the TURP group, there was no statistically significant difference between these 2 groups with regard to the changes in AUA symptom score, maximum flow rate and mean flow rate. From our preliminary results, TUVP with the double-bar electrode appears to be a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of symptomatic BPH.