Glycine 1.5% for Irrigation Should Be Abandoned
2013 (English)In: Urologia internationalis, ISSN 0042-1138, E-ISSN 1423-0399, Vol. 91, no 3, 249-255 p.Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Background: Glycine 1.5% has long maintained a dominating role as an irrigating solution for monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), as well as for certain other transurethral procedures. Materials and Methods: This review summarizes the findings of systematic experimental and clinical studies in which glycine 1.5% for irrigation was infused/absorbed and the outcome compared to at least one other irrigating fluid, including the isotonic saline used for bipolar TURP. Results: There were 11 studies in animals, 3 in volunteers and 6 in patients undergoing TURP. With only one exception, which is probably due to low power, these studies either show a poorer outcome after administration or absorption of glycine solution or else that glycine 2.2% is more toxic than glycine 1.5%. The poorer outcomes consisted of more tissue damage or higher mortality (animals) or more symptoms (volunteers and patients). Conclusion: The safety of monopolar TURP would be improved by replacing glycine 1.5% with some other electrolyte-free fluid. The author argues that glycine 1.5% should be abandoned completely.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Karger , 2013. Vol. 91, no 3, 249-255 p.
Glycine, Irrigation, Complications, Physiology, Prostatectomy
Medical and Health Sciences
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-100914DOI: 10.1159/000354933ISI: 000325832600001OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-100914DiVA: diva2:664315