Abstract
Introduction: Benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) is common in elderly men, and its prevalence increases with age. Acute urinary retention (ARU) is one of the most significant events in the natural history of BPE. This study assessed the prevalence of significant intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) and its correlation with prostate volume (PV) in patients with ARU due to BPE.
Methods: This hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of General Surgery at Lumbini Medical College and Teaching Hospital, Palpa, Nepal, over five months. A total of 94 men aged 45–85 years with ARU due to BPE were included using consecutive sampling. Assessment included clinical history, laboratory investigations, and transabdominal ultrasonography to measure PV and IPP. IPP >10 mm was considered significant. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics and Pearson's correlation coefficient.
Results: Mean age was 66.7 ± 10.4 years, mean PV was 42.9 ± 13.2 cc, and mean IPP was 10.8 ± 6.3 mm. Significant IPP (>10 mm) was present in 35 patients (37.2%). Grade I prostatomegaly (20–40 cc) was most common (54.3%). IPP showed a moderate positive correlation with PV (r = 0.394, p < 0.001). Half of the patients (50.0%) had previous ARU, and 33.0% had pyuria.
Conclusions: Significant IPP was present in over one-third of patients with ARU due to BPE. IPP correlated moderately with PV, suggesting that PV alone cannot fully explain the degree of protrusion. IPP may serve as a useful non-invasive tool to identify patients who might benefit from early surgical intervention.
References
1. Galeti EH, Rasool M, Bharali MD. Intravesical prostatic protrusion and prostate volume in patients with acute urine retention. International Surgery Journal. 2022;9(2):356-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20220323
2. Muruganandham K, Dubey D, Kapoor R. Acute urinary retention in benign prostatic hyperplasia: Risk factors and current management. Indian J Urol. 2007;23(4):347-53. PMID: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19718286/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.35050
3. Bajpai G, Gambhir S, Hariyawat BS. A correlation between intravesicle prostatic protrusion and prostate volume in patients presenting with acute urinary retention – a descriptive study. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research. 2023;16(9):111-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2023v16i9.47823
4. Zhang K, Xu Z, Zhang J, Wang H, Zhang D, Shi B. Clinical significance of intravesical prostatic protrusion in patients with benign prostatic enlargement. Urology. 2007;70(6):1096-99. PMID: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18158025/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.08.008
5. Tchaou M, Hounkpevi JM, Gbande P, Padja E, Kpatcha T, Gbadoe E, et al. Intravesical prostate protrusion (IPP) versus middle lobe volume on ultrasonography in assessing the impact of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Open Journal of Radiology. 2020;10(4):193-202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ojrad.2020.104019
6. Chia SJ, Heng CT, Chan SP, Foo KT. Correlation of intravesical prostatic protrusion with bladder outlet obstruction. BJU Int. 2003;91(4):371-4. PMID: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12603417/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04088.x
7. Sartori AM, Kessler TM, Castro-Díaz DM, de Keijzer P, Del Popolo G, Ecclestone H, et al. Summary of the 2024 update of the European Association of Urology Guidelines on Neuro-urology. European Urology. 2024;85(6):543-555. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.03.026
8. Mariappan P, Brown DJ, McNeill AS. Intravesical prostatic protrusion is better than prostate volume in predicting the outcome of trial without catheter in white men presenting with acute urinary retention: a prospective clinical study. J Urol. 2007;178(2):573-7. PMID: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17570437/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.116
9. Mehraban D. Clinical value of intravesical prostatic protrusion in the evaluation and management of prostatic and other lower urinary tract diseases. Asian J Urol. 2017;4(3):174-180. PMID: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29264227/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2016.10.001
10. Lieber MM, Jacobson DJ, McGree ME, St Sauver JL, Girman CJ, Jacobsen SJ. Intravesical prostatic protrusion in men in Olmsted County, Minnesota. J Urol. 2009;182(6):2819-24. PMID: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19837429/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.08.086
11. Partin AW, Dmochowski RR, Kavoussi LR, Peters CA, Wein AJ. Campbell-Walsh-Wein Urology. 12th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Elsevier; 2021. Available from: https://buyetextbook.com/product/campbell-walsh-wein-urology-12th-edition-original-pdf/
12. Lodh B, Sinam RS, Singh KA. Digital rectal grading of benign prostatic hyperplasia: Where does it stand today? Journal of Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences. 2016;21(1):40-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-9903.178104
13. Sigdel G, Belokar WK. Clinical significance of intravesical prostatic protrusion in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Journal of Universal College of Medical Sciences. 2015;3(1):6-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3126/jucms.v3i1.13248
14. Thomas K, Oades G, Taylor-Hay C, Kirby RS. Acute urinary retention: what is the impact on patients’ quality of life? BJU Int. 2005;95(1):72-6. PMID: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15638898/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.05254.x
15. Lim KB, HO H, Foo KT, Wong MY, Fook-Chong S. Comparison of intravesical prostatic protrusion, prostate volume and serum prostate-specific antigen in the evaluation of bladder outlet obstruction. Int J Urol. 2006;13(12):1509-13. PMID: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17118026/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2006.01611.x
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Pawan Tiwari, Saurav Bajracharya, Sabir Miya, Arpana Shrestha, Raj Kumar Chhetri