Predictors of Urethral Stricture After Transurethral Resection of the Prostate Procedure

Daniel Saputra, Ahmad Agil, Akhmad Mustafa


Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the most frequently used urology surgical method to manage benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). Despite the relatively efficacious treatment, urethral stricture (US) may form after TURP. The prevalence of the urethral strictures (US) following TURP ranges from 2.2% to 9.8%. The study aimed to identify the predictors of urethral strictures in patients receiving TURP. This study was a retrospective cohort study on patients underwent TURP in Dr. Hasan Sadikin General Hospital Bandung, Indonesia, between 2015 and 2019. Data were obtained from medical records and urology registry of a minimum 12-month follow-up period. Data on patient demographics, estimated volume of the prostate, total resected prostate, and operating time were extracted. Multiple logistic regression was utilized to determine the odds ratio difference between groups. A total of 451 TURP cases were performed between 2015 and 2019, with 22 (4.87%) cases of post TURP US identified. The mean estimated prostate weight was 45.6 g and resected prostate weight was 20.4 g, with a 0.37 gr/min resection rate. Prostate weight, operating time, and duration of catheterization after surgery were not significantly different statistically. Slower resection rate and smaller resected volume are the statistically significant predictors of increased occurrence of urethral stricture (p<0.05). Lower resection rate is also a predictor for urethral stricture after TURP procedure.


Predictor Factor, TURP, Urethral Stricture

Full Text:



  1. Wang JW, Man LB. Transurethral resection of the prostate stricture management. Asian journal of andrology. 2020;22(2):140–4.
  2. Tao H, Jiang YY, Jun Q, Ding X, Jian DL, Jie D, et al. Analysis of risk factors leading to postoperative urethral stricture and bladder neck contracture following transurethral resection of prostate. Int Braz J Urol. 2016;42(2):302–11.
  3. Tan GH, Shah SA, Ali NM, Goh EH, Singam P, Ho CCK, et al. Urethral strictures after bipolar transurethral resection of prostate may be linked to slow resection rate. Investig Clin Urol. 2017;58(3):186–91.
  4. Kumar BN, Srivastava A, Sinha T. Urethral stricture after bipolar transurethral resection of prostate - truth vs hype: A randomized controlled trial. Indian J Urol. 2019;35(1):41–7.
  5. Chughtai B, Simma-Chiang V, Kaplan SA. Evaluation and management of post-transurethral resection of the prostate lower urinary tract symptoms. Curr Urology Rep. 2014;15(9):1–5.
  6. Mayer EK, Kroeze SG, Chopra S, Bottle A, Patel A. Examining the ‘gold standard’: a comparative critical analysis of three consecutive decades of monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) outcomes. BJU Int. 2012;110(11):1595–601.
  7. Günes M, Keles MO, Kaya C, Koca O, Sertkaya Z, Akyüz M, et al. Does resectoscope size play a role in formation of urethral stricture following transurethral prostate resection?. International Braz J Urol. 2015;41:744–9.
  8. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R. Complications of transurethral resectionof the prostate(TURP) – incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol 2006;50:969–79.
  9. Tang Y, Li J, Pu C, Bai Y, Yuan H, Wei Q, et al. Bipolar transurethral resection versus monopolar transurethral resection for benign prostatic hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourology. 2014;28(9):1107–14.
  10. Tian Y, Wazir R, Yue X, Wang KJ, Li H. Prevention of stricture recurrence following urethral endoscopic management: what do we have?. J Endourology. 2014;28(5):502–8.
  11. Komura K, Inamoto T, Takai T, Uchimoto T, Saito K, et al. Incidence of urethral stricture after bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate using TURis: results from a randomized trial. BJU Int. 2015;115:644–52.
  12. Adi K, Alhajeri F, Satyagraha P. World Changing Scenario of Urethral Stricture Management. In: Martins FE, Kulkarni SB, Köhler TS, editors. Textbook of male genitourethral reconstruction. Cham Springer; 2020. p. 33–43.
  13. Mamoulakis C, Skolarikos A, Schulze M, Scoffone CM, Rassweiler JJ, Alivizatos G, et al. Results from an international multicentre double‐blind randomized controlled trial on the perioperative efficacy and safety of bipolar vs monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. BJU Int. 2012;109(2):240–8.
  14. Mamoulakis C, Schulze M, Skolarikos A, Alivizatos G, Scarpa RM, Rassweiler JJ, et al. Midterm results from an international multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar with monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. European Urology. 2013;63(4):667–76.
  15. Alhajeri F, Alwaal A, Soebadi MA. Etiology, epidemiology, demographic differences in urethral strictures: a worldwide perspective. In: Martins FE, Kulkarni SB, Köhler TS, editors. Textbook of male genitourethral reconstruction. Cham: Springer; 2020. p. 25–32.
  16. Pham H, Sharma P. Emerging, newly-approved treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hypertrophy. Can J Urol. 2018;25:9228–37.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 284 times
PDF - 343 times

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.


Creative Commons License
MKB is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License


View My Stats