Learning curves and perioperative outcomes after endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a comparison between GreenLight 532-nm and holmium lasers

WATER versus WATER II 5-year update: Comparing Aquablation therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia in 30-80-cm3 and 80-150-cm3 prostates

Objective

This study aims to compare the long-term outcomes of Aquablation for small-to-moderate (30-80 cm3) prostates with the outcomes for large (80-150 cm3) prostates at 5-year follow up.

Methods

The Waterjet Ablation Therapy for Endoscopic Resection of Prostate Tissue (WATER; NCT02505919) is a prospective, double-blind, international clinical trial encompassing 116 patients, examining Aquablation versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for LUTS/BPH in prostates sized between 30 and 80 cm3. In parallel, WATER II (W-II; NCT03123250), a prospective, multicentre, single-arm international clinical trial, explores Aquablation outcomes in prostates ranging from 80 to 150 cm3. Baseline parameters and 60-month outcomes were scrutinized using statistical analyses, including Students' t test, Wilcoxon tests for continuous variables, and Fisher's test for binary variables.

Results

There is a significant improvement in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) from baseline to 60 months in both WATER (22.9 to 7.0) and WATER II (23.2 to 6.8) (P = 0.852). Urinary flow rate (Qmax) increased in both groups from baseline to 60 months (WATER: 9.4 to 17.3 cc/s; WATER II: 8.7 to 17.1 cc/s) (P = 0.933). Immediate and sustained enhancements were observed in IPSS and Qmax. At 5 years, a notable percentage of patients in both groups were BPH medication-free (WATER: 99%; WATER II: 94%) (P = 0.0517) and free from surgical retreatment (WATER: 95%; WATER II: 97%) (P = 0.508).

Conclusions

The 5-year follow-up affirms that Aquablation therapy exhibits sustained outcomes, minimal irreversible complications, and low retreatment rates for treating LUTS/BPH, irrespective of prostate volume ranging from 30 to 150 cm3.

Evaluation of new treatments for benign prostatic obstruction: ICI-RS 2023

AIMS

To address how invasive therapies for benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) have been evaluated, what their effect is on BPO, if they can prevent progression to BPO and how new therapies need to be evaluated before implementation into clinical practice.

METHODS

The think tank conducted a literature review and looked at the previous and current American Urological Association, European Association of Urology and the International Consultation on Urological Diseases guidelines to see what procedures have been used to treat BPO. They then assessed whether trials have been conducted before implementation of the procedures and whether they have been compared to a "gold" standard treatment. The use of urodynamics has also been addressed in the think tank in relation the clinical trials as well as terminology.

RESULTS

Guidelines vary in the use of terminology when it comes to BPO with some continuing to use the term benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). There are several procedures for example, TUNA, which have become obsolete although continues to be mentioned in the guidelines until recently. Majority of procedures have been introduced without comparing to "gold" standard treatment and without any long-term data. There continues to be many unknowns with regard to the success of some of the BPO procedures and why some of the adverse events develop.

CONCLUSION

There needs to be more robust long-term clinical trials conducted of new BPO therapies, with men who have both lower urinary tract symptoms and urinary retention, before introduction into clinical practice.

Evaluation of learning curves for contact laser vaporization of the prostate using the 980 nm diode laser for benign prostatic hyperplasia

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the background of patients who underwent contact laser vaporization of the prostate (CVP) surgery and the learning curve of the operators.

METHODS

A total of 207 patients who underwent CVP surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia between August 2018 and March 2023 were included in this study. Patient background, perioperative results, pre- and postoperative urinary flow tests, and complications were collected retrospectively.

RESULTS

We enrolled 12 doctors who were divided into expert (five doctors) and novice (seven doctors) groups based on the number of TURP experiences before CVP. The median patient age was 73 years (51-92 years) and prostate volume was 56 cc (15-190 cc) with no difference between the expert and novice groups. Complications included urinary retention (eight cases), hematuria (four), urinary tract infection (four), intraoperative perforation (two), and postoperative stricture (one). Both cases of intraoperative perforation occurred in the novice group. The expert group had a significantly shorter operative time (38 vs. 66 min) and a higher operative efficacy of prostate volume divided by operative time (1.43 vs. 0.88 cc/min). Postoperatively, IPSS, quality of life scores, and postvoid residual urine volume decreased, and maximal flow rate increased; however, there was no significant difference between the groups. The expert group showed stable operative time and operative efficacy after about five to eight cases, while the novice group showed stable after about 15 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that CVP was safely performed at our hospital, and operators with limited experience in TURP can achieve stable perioperative results.

Optimizing outcome reporting after robotic flexible ureteroscopy for management of renal calculi: Introducing the concept of tetrafecta

Robotic flexible ureteroscopy (RFURS) has shown encouraging results in terms of stone free rate (SFR) and better ergonomics compared to conventional FURS. However, few studies have reported its outcomes. The goal of this study was to report our initial results of RFURS, furthermore we proposed a novel metrics for composite outcome reporting named tetrafecta. A retrospective analysis of electronic records of 100 patients treated with RFURS for renal stones between 2019 till 2023 was performed. Tetrafecta criteria included, complete stone removal after a single treatment session, without auxiliary procedures, absence of high-grade complications (GIII-V) and same-day hospital discharge. Mean patient age and stone size were 40.7 ± 9.2 and 11.7 ± 5.8 mm, respectively. Median stone volume was 916 (421-12,235) mm3. Twenty-eight patients had multiple renal stones. Staghorn stones were seen in 12 patients. Preoperative DJ stent was fixed in 58 patients. Median operative time and stone treatment time were 116 min (97-148) and 37 (22-69) min. The median stone treatment efficiency (STE) was 21.6 (8.9-41.6). A strong positive correlation between stone volume and STE (R = 0.8, p < 0.0001). Overall, 73 patients were stone free after the initial treatment session while tetrafecta was achieved in 70 patients. Univariate analysis showed that the stone size (p = 0.008), acute infundibulopelvic angle (p = 0.023) and preoperative stenting (p = 0.017) had significant influence on achieving tetrafecta. Multivariate analysis identified preoperative stenting (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8, p = 0.019) as the only independent predictor of tetrafecta achievement. A comprehensive reporting methodology for reporting outcomes of RFURS is indicated for patient counseling and comparing different techniques. Tetrafecta was achieved in 70% of cases. Presence of significant residual stones ≥ 3mm was the leading cause of missing tetrafecta. Absence of preoperative stent was the only predictor of missing tetrafecta.

A Delphi consensus to standardize the technique of anatomical endoscopic enucleation of prostate: a study by ESUT endoscopic enucleation of prostate study group

PURPOSE

Our objective was to establish a standardized technique for Anatomical Endoscopic Enucleation of Prostate (AEEP) utilizing a consensus statement to provide robust recommendations for urologists who are new to this procedure.

METHODS

The participants were electronically sent a questionnaire in three consecutive rounds. In the second and third rounds, the anonymous aggregate results of the previous round were presented. Experts' feedback and comments were then incorporated to refine existing questions or to explore more controversial topics in greater depth.

RESULTS

Forty-one urologists participated in the first round. In the second round, all Round 1 participants received a 22-question survey, resulting in a consensus on 21 items. In the third round, 76% (19/25) of the second-round respondents also participated, reaching a consensus on 22 additional items. The panelists consensually agreed on detaching the urethral sphincter at the beginning of the enucleation and not at the end of the enucleation. To prevent incontinence, it was recommended that the apical mucosa be preserved through various approaches between 11 and 1 o'clock while gently disrupting the lateral lobes in their apical part, avoiding an excess energy delivery approximation to the apical mucosa.

CONCLUSION

To optimize laser AEEP procedures, urologists must follow expert guidelines on equipment and surgical technique, including early apical release, using the 3-lobe technique for enucleation, preserving apical mucosa with appropriate approaches, gently disrupting lateral lobes at their apical regions, and avoiding excessive energy delivery near the apical mucosa. Following these recommendations can lead to improved outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Comparison of holmium laser enucleation and transurethral resection of prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the gold-standard classical method for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In minimally invasive surgery, holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is considered an alternative option. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to comprehensively evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of TURP and HoLEP the treating BPH. We comprehensively searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for all randomized controlled trials published before 1 December 2022 comparing HoLEP and TURP. The study protocol is registered on INPLASY (DOI: 10.37766/inplasy2023.5.0065). Compared with TURP, HoLEP required longer operation time but shorter catheter duration, hospital stay, and bladder irrigation time, as well as less postoperative irrigation. With HoLEP, maximum urinary flow rate at 12 and 24 months after surgery; post-void residual volume at 1, 6, and 12 months; and International Prostate Symptom Score at 12 months after surgery were superior to those with TURP. HoLEP was associated with significantly lower risk of hyponatremia, blood transfusion, and urethral stricture but greater risk of postoperative dysuria. Compared with TURP, HoLEP had better curative efficacy at 6, 12, and 24 months after operation and lower incidence of adverse events in patients with BPH.

Residency Surgical BPH Training Paradigms from MIST to HOLEP

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common medical condition of older men that often requires medical or surgical therapy. Surgical options for BPH have grown exponentially over the last two decades. The numerous options and/or lack of access to them can make it challenging for new trainees to gain proficiency. We examine the literature for available BPH surgical simulators, learning curves, and training pathways.

RECENT FINDINGS

Each BPH surgical therapy has a learning curve which must be overcome. There is an abundance of TURP simulators which have shown face, content, and construct validity in the literature. Similarly, laser therapies have validated simulators. Newer technologies do have available simulators, but they have not been validated. There are strategies to improve learning and outcomes, such as having a structured training program. Simulators are available for BPH surgical procedures and some have been implemented in urology residencies. It is likely that such simulation may make urologists more facile on their learning curves for newer technologies. Further studies are needed. Future directions may include integration of simulator technology into training pathways that include surgical observation and proctorship.

Budget impact analysis of transurethral water vapor therapy for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia in the Spanish national healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Several surgical treatments are available for managing lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) is a new minimally invasive therapy. This study estimates the budget impact of introducing WVTT for LUTS/BPH into the Spanish health care system.

METHODS

A model simulated the evolution of men over 45 years of age with moderate-severe LUTS/BPH after surgical treatment, over a 4-year time horizon, from the Spanish public health care service´s perspective. The technologies in scope included those most used in Spain: WVTT, transurethral resection (TURP), photoselective laser vapourization (PVP) and holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP). Transition probabilities, adverse events and costs were identified from the scientific literature and validated by a panel of experts. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the most uncertain parameters.

RESULTS

Per intervention, WVTT resulted in savings of €3,317, €1,933 and €2,661 compared to TURP, PVP and HoLEP. Over a 4-year time horizon, when performed in 10% of the cohort of 109,603 Spanish males with LUTS/BPH, WVTT saved €28,770,125 against the scenario without WVTT availability.

CONCLUSIONS

WVTT could reduce the cost of managing LUTS/BPH, increase the quality of health care and reduce the length of procedure and hospital stay.

Analysing the learning curve of prostate enucleation with the Holmium laser: A retrospective, single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is a proven surgical technique for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, its challenging learning curve prevents its widespread adoption by urologists. The aim of this study was to analyse the learning curve of HoLEP and to determine the factors accelerating it.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, monocentric cohort study of the first 60 cases of HoLEP performed by three operators. The primary outcome measure was operative efficiency, defined as the ratio of preoperative prostate volume estimated by trans-abdominal ultrasound (TAUS)to total surgical time in minutes. The studied learning curve parameters included the number of previously performed cases (NPPCs) and monthly case density (CD) (number of monthly performed cases before the studied one).

RESULTS

Overall, 180 patients with a mean age of 71 (±9) years and a mean prostate volume (g) of 80.4 (±41) were included. The mean operative efficiency in the population was 0.74 (±0.37) g/min. Operative efficiency was increased in patients who had been operated on by surgeons with a CD ≥3 (CD ≤2: 0.66 (±0.27) g/min vs. CD ≥3: 0.79 (±0.43) g/min; P=0.012). At 3months, 46 patients (29%) developed stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Early SUI was significantly decreased in patients who had been operated on by surgeons with a CD ≥3 (CD ≤2: 37%, (n=26) vs CD ≥3: 22%, (n=20); P=0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

A high frequency HoLEP procedures, set as one case per week, appeared to accelerate learning curves by improving operative efficiency. A high CD was also associated with reduced rates of early SUI.

LEVEL OF PROOF

5.

Patterns and Predictors of Optimal Surgical and Functional Outcomes after Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP): Introducing the Concept of "Trifecta"

PURPOSE

The present study sought to provide reproducible and patient-oriented metrics to assess the rate of "successful" outcomes (Trifecta) following holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). Clinical and surgical predictors of failure to achieve Trifecta were investigated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We queried our prospectively collected database of all patients treated with HoLEP between March 2017 and January 2021. Trifecta was defined as the contemporary presence of: (1) no postoperative complication within 3 months; (2) no urinary incontinence at 3-months follow-up; and (3) 3-month postoperative max flow-rate >15 mL/s. Cases were grouped according to Trifecta achievement. All surgical procedures were carried out by a single surgeon. Surgical experience was divided into two different eras according to the number of procedures conducted (surgical era). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess predictors of Trifecta failure.

RESULTS

Overall 305 patients were included. Of these, 192 patients (63.0%) achieved Trifecta. Preoperative patient-related features were comparable between the two groups, except for a higher post-void residual (PVR) in non-Trifecta patients (median 180 vs. 130 mL, p=0.003). A significant proportion of Trifecta patients (88.5%) were treated in the second surgical era and in 126 (65.6%) cases an en-bloc enucleation was performed. Multivariate analysis confirmed PVR ≥250 mL, first surgical era and standard three-lobes enucleation technique as independent predictors of Trifecta failure.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience the rate of "successful" HoLEP, defined according to our newly introduced Trifecta metric, was 63.0%. We demonstrated that surgical strategy together with rising experience and baseline PVR are key elements to forecast the outcomes.

Learning curve and functional outcomes after laser enucleation of the prostate for benign prostate hyperplasia according to surgeon's caseload

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of surgical caseload on safety, efficacy, and functional outcomes of laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) applying a structured mentoring program.

METHODS

Patient characteristics, perioperative data, and functional outcomes were analyzed descriptively. Linear and logistic regression models analyzed the effect of caseload on complications, functional outcomes and operative speed. Within the structured mentoring program a senior surgeon was present for the first 24 procedures completely, for partial steps in procedures 25-49, and as needed thereafter.

RESULTS

A total of 677 patients from our prospective institutional database (2017-2022) were included for analysis. Of these, 84 (12%), 75 (11%), 82 (12%), 106 (16%), and 330 patients (49%) were operated by surgeons at (A) < 25, (B) 25-49, (C) 50-99, (D) 100-199, and (E) ≥ 200 procedures. Preoperative characteristics were balanced (all p > 0.05) except for prostate volume, which increased with caseload. There was no significant difference in change of IPSS, Quality of life, ICIQ, pad usage, peak urine flow, residual urine, and major complications (Group A: 8.3 to E: 7.6%, p = 0.2) depending on the caseload. Caseload was not associated (Odds ratio: 0.7-1.4, p > 0.2) with major complications in the multivariable logistic regression model. Only operating time was significantly shorter with increasing caseload in the multivariable analysis (111-55 min, beta 23.9-62.9, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

With a structured mentoring program, the safety and efficacy of LEP can be ensured even during the learning curve with very good outcome quality. Only the operating time decreases significantly with increasing experience of the surgeon.

Robotic versus open simple prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands: single-centre study

PURPOSE

Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a recently described surgical approach, but comparison with open simple prostatectomy (OSP) lack in the literature. We compared perioperative outcomes of OSP versus RASP.

METHODS

Patients who underwent simple prostatectomy between 2017 and 2020 were included in this retrospective study. OSP was performed by the transvesical technique and RASP was performed with a DaVinci Xi robot, using the transvesical extraperitoneal approach. Perioperative and postoperative data were compared and complications risk factors for complications were identified.

RESULTS

and limitations. Overall, 103 patients were included (median age 72 years [IQR = 67-76]). Forty-seven underwent RASP and 56 OSP. The median volume of the prostate gland was 130 mL [IQR = 100-180] in the RASP group and 126 mL [IQR = 100-160] in the OSP group. RASP was associated with a significant reduction in blood loss (median 200 vs. 400 mL; p < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (5 vs. 10 days; p < 0.001) and median catheterisation time (4 vs. 9 days; p < 0.001). In the RASP group, there were fewer grade ≥ 2 complications (2 (4.3%) vs. 13 (23.2%); p = 0.005) and less need for transfusions (0 vs. 6 (11%), p = 0.005). Preoperative prostate volume was a risk factor for complications (OR = 1.2 [95% CI 1.1-1.5]; p = 0.01) while robot-assisted surgery was a protective factor (OR 0.3 [95% CI 0.05-0.9]; p = 0.05). Functional outcomes between the two groups were identical at 12 months follow up.

CONCLUSION

RASP is a safe and effective procedure. When compared with OSP, RASP was associated with decreased morbidity as well as reduced hospital stay and catheterisation time. Functional outcomes were comparable to the open approach.

Switching lasers: learning curve of HoLEP in surgeons experienced in ThuLEP

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate perioperative parameters, clinical outcomes, and the learning curve of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in surgeons with experience in thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The learning curves for HoLEP of the first 50 consecutive patients of two surgeons experienced in ThuLEP were analyzed. In addition, demographic parameters, clini¬cal outcomes and adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean operation time was 70.9 + 29.7 min (SD) (Surgeon 1) and 74.4 + 35.4 min (Surgeon 2), the mean enucleation efficiency was 1.5 + 0.6 g/min (Surgeon 1) and 1.5 + 0.7 g/min (Surgeon 2). The hemoglobin loss was 0.9 + 0.8 g/dl and 0.8 + 0.8 g/dl. For both surgeons, there was a significant learning curve in enucleation efficiency within the first 50 cases (Surgeon 1: p = .034, Surgeon 2: p = .006, both: p = .0003, Spearman's ρ = .351). Both surgeons started with an enucleation efficiency of around 1g/min in their first 10 cases. No significant correlation between hemoglobin loss and experience could be found (p = .823, ρ = .025). While there was no significant learning curve for morcellation efficiency (p = .785, ρ = .028), a significant progress was found for one of the two surgeons regarding laser energy efficiency (p = .014). The overall incidence of all grade treatment-related adverse events was very low at 10.0%, and extremely low for significant complications with Clavien-Dindo Grade > II at 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis, switching to HoLEP is uncomplicated and safe for experienced ThuLEP surgeons. The enucleation efficiency was high from the beginning, but a learning curve was present for both surgeons. No learning curve was noticeable in hemoglobin loss and the incidence of complications, both of which were very low throughout the study.

Randomized prospective trial of the severity of irritative symptoms after HoLEP vs ThuFLEP

PURPOSE

To compare the short-term postoperative functional outcomes and severity of irritative symptoms following holmium and thulium fiber laser enucleation (HoLEP and ThuFLEP).

METHODS

This prospective randomized single-blinded study was performed in accordance with CONSORT. The inclusion criteria were IPSS > 20 or Qmax < 10 ml/s. Patients were randomized between HoLEP and ThuFLEP. Demographics, objective data (PSA, prostate volume, etc.), data on urinary and sexual function (IPSS, IIEF, QoL, QUID, Qmax, ICIQ-MLUTS) were collected. Detailed perioperative information and postoperative data on functional outcomes at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 weeks and 6 months were collected.

RESULTS

Data on 163 participants were included (77-HoLEP, 86-ThuFLEP). No differences were found in surgery duration; number of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo I-III), catheterization time and hospital stay. Functional outcomes up to 6 months didn't differ between the groups (IPPS, IIEF, QoL, QUID, ICIQ-MLUTS, Qmax, p > 0.05). Total ICIQ-MLUTS, bother and voiding scores at 1 and 3 months significantly increased compared with the baseline in both groups (p < 0.05). No difference between the groups were observed. In HoLEP the SUI series rate was 1.3% and 1.3% after 3 and 6 months following the procedure; in ThuFLEP: it was 3.5% and 2.3% respectively (p = 0.35 and p = 0.54).

CONCLUSION

The preliminary results of the study showed no apparent differences in functional outcomes (IPSS, Qmax), rate of SUI or irritative symptoms. Both ThuFLEP and HoLEP are efficient ways of treating benign prostatic obstruction. Both surgeries are comparable in terms of duration and postoperative complication rates.

Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate Is Better than Robot-assisted Simple Prostatectomy

In 2022, endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) is the treatment of choice for benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) for glands >80 ml and is a valid alternative for patients with bleeding disorders. Unlike robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, EEP has no additional access-related trauma and can be performed using the same instruments as for bipolar enucleoresection. With favorable costs, EEP can serve as a global solution for BPO treatment.

Utilizing Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Self-assess Enucleation Ratio in Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate

OBJECTIVE

To determine if transition zone (TZ) volume as measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) correlates closely with specimen weight and postoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and to determine if this correlation improved with increased experience. We hypothesize that information from a preoperative MRI can be leveraged to self-assess competency in holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP).

METHODS

From August 2018 to June 2021 567 men were identified who underwent HoLEP by a single surgeon and had their data entered into a database. Ninety-seven men were identified who had an MRI in our image archives. A radiologist blinded to the specimen weight measured the transition zone (TZ) using image analysis software. TZ volume was then correlated with specimen weight for the entire study period and subdivided into four consecutive periods. Preoperative and Postoperative PSA data was analyzed.

RESULTS

Seventeen percent of men who underwent HoLEP at our institution had an MRI preoperatively. The TZ to total prostate volume ratio was 70%. The overall correlation coefficient between TZ volume and specimen weight was 0.914 (P-value <.001). There was no statistically significant improvement in correlation coefficient over time when divided into four equal subgroups. Median PSA reduction was 91% (7.9-0.7 ng/dL).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative MRI derived TZ volume correlates closely with specimen weight. We present a reference cohort from a high volume HoLEP center to facilitate HoLEP learners to self-assess competency. Lack of increased correlation over time is likely due to an experienced HoLEP surgeon who is on the flatter portion of his learning curve.

Perioperative Outcomes of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to systematically review the literature and describe perioperative complications of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), including the Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications.

METHODS

All English language publications on HoLEP were evaluated. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to evaluate PubMed®, Scopus®, and Web of Science™ databases from January 1, 1998, to June 1, 2020.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies were included, for a total of 10,371 procedures. We distinguished between intra-, peri-, and postoperative complications. Overall, the rate of complications is 0-7%. Intraoperative complications include incomplete morcellation (2.3%), capsular perforation (2.2%), bladder (2.4%), and ureteric orifice (0.4%) injuries. Perioperative complications include postoperative urinary retention (0.2%), hematuria and clot retention (2.6%), and cystoscopy for clot evacuation (0.7%). Postoperative complications include dysuria (7.5%), stress (4.0%), urge (1.8%), transient (7%) and permanent (1.3%) urinary incontinence, urethral stricture (2%) and bladder neck contracture (1%).

CONCLUSIONS

HoLEP is a safe procedure, with a satisfactory low complication rate. The most common reported perioperative complications are not severe (Clavien-Dindo classification grades 1-2). Further randomized studies are certainly warranted to fully determine the predictor of surgical complications in order to prevent them and improve this technique.

Proctored Step by Step Training Program for GreenLight Laser Anatomic Photovaporization of the Prostate: A Single Surgeon's Experience

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of a proctored step-by-step training program for GreenLight laser anatomic photovaporization (aPVP) of the prostate. Methods: Data from patients undergoing aPVP between January 2019 and December 2020 operated by a single surgeon following a dedicated step-by-step proctored program were prospectively collected. The procedure was divided into five modular steps of increasing complexity. Preoperative patients' data as well as total operative time, energy delivered on the prostate and postoperative data, were recorded. Then, we assessed how the overall amount of energy delivered and the operative times varied during the training program. Surgical steps were analyzed by cumulative summation. Univariable and multivariable regression models were built to assess the predictors of the amount of energy delivered on the prostate. Results: Sixty consecutive patients were included in the analysis. Median prostate volume was 56.5 mL. The training program was succesfully completed with no intraoperative or meaningful post-operative complications. The energy delivered reached the plateau after the 40th case. At multivariable analysis, increasing surgeon experience was associated with lower amounts of energy delivered as well as lower operative times. Conclusions: A step-by-step aPVP training program can be safely performed by surgeons with prior endoscopic experience if mentored by a skilled proctor. Considering the energy delivered as an efficacy surrogate metrics (given its potential impact on persistent postoperative LUTS), 40 cases are needed to reach a plateau for aPVP proficiency. Further studies are needed to assess the safety of our step-by-step training modular program in other clinical contexts.

Reasons to go for thulium-based anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate

PURPOSE

To summarize the current evidence and the reasons to go for thulium-based anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP).

METHODS

This review discusses the available literature on thulium-based AEEP.

RESULTS

Thulium lasers operate at a wavelength between 1940 and 2013 nm. This wavelength, which has a low penetration depth in water, allows to perform smooth cuts in the prostatic tissue and allows urologists to perform various procedures: resection, vaporization, enucleation, or vapoenucleation of the prostate. Depending on the type of thulium laser, it can be used either in a continuous, or pulsed mode.

CONCLUSION

In recent years, an increasing amount of evidence has described the thulium laser as a minimally invasive and size-independent treatment option for benign prostatic enlargement with excellent long-term results.

En-Bloc Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate with Early Apical Release: Are We Ready for a New Paradigm?

Background: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is considered a safe and effective treatment in case of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). Despite technical execution has evolved over time, from the standard three-lobes to the more recent en-bloc approaches, data comparing these two techniques are missing. The aim of the present study was to describe our en-bloc HoLEP with early apical release technique and compare peri- and postoperative results with the classical three-lobe approach in a single referral center. Materials and Methods: We prospectively analyzed all consecutive cases between 2017 and 2019 divided according to the type of approach. Patients were preoperatively studied through instrumental assessment and clinical evaluation, using validated questionnaires and then postoperatively at specific time frames. Linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate possible predictor of continuous variables. All the procedures were carried out by one single expert surgeon. Results: Overall, 168 patients were included, of which 81 were treated with classical three-lobes and 87 with en-bloc with early apical release technique. The two cohorts were comparable related to preoperative features and postoperative complication rate. Mean enucleation time (ET), lasing time, amount of energy delivered, and overall operative time were significantly lower in en-bloc procedures (p < 0.05). Stepwise multivariable linear regression showed that en-bloc strategy can significantly predict shorter ET and lower energy delivered. Stress incontinence rate at 1-month follow-up was found to be significantly reduced in the en-bloc group, compared with the counterpart. Conclusions: Both techniques are effective and safe treatment options for BOO, since peri- and postoperative surgical and functional outcomes were favorable. En-bloc strategy may significantly decrease ET and the amount of energy delivered leading to a reduced early stress incontinence rate compared with the standard approach.

Greenlight laser photoselective vaporization vs open simple prostatectomy: long-term functional outcomes after treatment of large volume prostates (> 80 cc)

PURPOSE

To compare long-term outcomes between photoselective vaporization (PVP) and Open simple prostatectomy (OSP) for prostates > 80 cc.

METHODS

Men operated either by PVP or OSP for BPH > 80 cc were included in two expert centres. Functional and uroflowmetric outcomes were assessed pre- and postoperatively. Data were collected prospectively in the PVP group and retrospectively in the OSP group and compared at long-term follow-up. Complications and re-intervention rates were used as main outcomes.

RESULTS

332 men underwent surgery: 132 PVP were performed in a fist expert-centre and 200 OSP were performed in a second one with a median follow-up of 54 and 48 months, respectively. Mean Prostate volume was similar between OSP and PVP group (119 vs 116 cc). Major complications were more common in the OSP group (12.5 vs 1.5%, p < 0.001). At long-term follow-up, Qmax was higher and PVR was lower (p < 0.05) in the OSP group. IPSS score was similar between groups (p = 0.45) but the Qol was better in the OSP group (0.9 vs. 1.6; p < 0.05). There were more re-interventions in the PVP group compared to OSP (15.2 vs. 0%, p < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

PVP is a good alternative for prostates > 80 cc particularly for fragile patients as it is associated with a lower complication rate. At long-term follow-up, IPSS was similar between groups, but Qol was better in the OSP group. Patients treated by PVP should be informed that they could require reoperation in 15% of the cases.

Recent evidence for anatomic endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) in patients with benign prostatic obstruction on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy

INTRODUCTION

Due to demographic changes in today's society, the number of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is increasing. Similarly, the proportion of patients with cardiovascular risk factors undergoing antiplatelet (AP) or anticoagulation (AC) therapy is growing as well.

METHODS

This review discusses the current literature on various techniques used for anatomic endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) in patients on AC/AP therapy.

RESULTS

The large number of energy sources used for AEEP makes it difficult to compare them. Overall, fewer bleeding-associated complications arise in patients under AP compared to AC or bridging therapy with low molecular weight heparin. However, perioperatively both AP and AC therapy lead to a higher risk of bleeding complications compared to patients not taking anticoagulants.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature shows that AEEP is possible and efficacious in patients under AC/AP therapy, with only slight differences compared to patients not taking AC/AP drugs, on a short and long-term basis. Nevertheless, the sparse data, the retrospective nature of many studies and the inclusion of prostate sizes between 50 and 110 ml only, make it difficult to come to strong conclusions.

Propensity-score analysis comparing perioperative and functional outcomes between XPS 180 W-photovaporization and GreenLight laser enucleation of the prostate: reasons to discard vaporization and move to enucleation

PURPOSE

To compare the perioperative and functional outcomes between 180_W XPS GreenLight photoselective vaporization (PVP) and 532-nm GreenLight laser enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP) in the surgical management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

METHODS

Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained international database of patients managed with GreenLight laser surgery (PVP or GreenLEP) was performed. To adjust for potential baseline confounders, propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied at a ratio of 1:1 to compare the perioperative and functional outcomes between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 2,420 patients were included. 1,491 (61.6%) underwent PVP and 929 (38.4%) underwent GreenLEP. Before PSM analysis, patients in the vaporization group were older (p < 0.001), had a lower PSA and prostate volume at baseline (p < 0.001). Using estimated propensity scores, 78 patients in the PVP group were matched 1:1 to the patients in the GreenLEP group. The incidence of overall postoperative complications was comparable between the two groups (19 vs. 16%, p = 0.06). However, after PSM, PVP was found to be associated with a higher rate of overall complications (33 vs. 11%, p = 0.001). At 3 months and at last follow-up the I-PSS, Qmax and PSA had similarly decreased in the two groups with a greater improvement in the GreenLEP group (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

PVP and GreenLEP are two efficient and safe techniques for treating BPO. However, PVP was associated with longer operative time and higher risk of reoperation on a midterm follow-up compared to GreenLEP.

WATER versus WATER II 2-Year Update: Comparing Aquablation Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in 30-80-cm3 and 80-150-cm3 Prostates

Background

Surgical options are limited when treating large (>80 cm³) prostates for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Open simple prostatectomy remains the most common procedure performed for large prostates. There is a need for novel surgical approaches with shorter learning curves and effective treatment. Aquablation could be this novel tool.

Objective

To compare the outcome of Aquablation for 30-80-cm³ prostates with the outcome for 80-150-cm³ prostates at 2-yr follow-up.

Design setting and participants

We used data from two trials. WATER is a prospective, double-blind, multicenter, international clinical trial comparing the safety and efficacy of Aquablation and transurethral resection of the prostate in the treatment of LUTS/BPH in men aged 45-80 yr with a prostate of 30-80 cm³. WATER II is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm international clinical trial of Aquablation in men with a prostate of 80-150 cm³.

Intervention

Aquablation, an ultrasound-guided, robotically executed waterjet ablative procedure.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

We compared 24-mo outcomes between 116 WATER and 101 WATER II study subjects. Student's t test or a Wilcoxon test was used to compare continuous variables and Fisher's test for categorical variables.

Results and limitations

The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) reductions at 24 mo was 14.5 points for WATER and 17.4 points for WATER II (p = 0.31). At baseline, the maximum urinary flow rate (Q_max) was 9.4 and 8.7 cm³/s in WATER and WATER II, improving to 20.5 and 18.2 cm³/s, respectively (p = 0.60) at 24 mo. Improvements in both IPSS and Q_max were immediate and sustained throughout follow-up. At 2 yr, the surgical retreatment rate was 4% in WATER and 2% in WATER II.

Conclusions

Aquablation is effective in patients with a prostate of 30-80 cm³ and patients with a prostate of 80-150 cm³ treated for LUTS/BPH, with comparable outcomes in both groups. It has low complication and retreatment rates at 2 yr of follow-up, with durable improvements in functional outcome.

Patient summary

Outcomes of Aquablation for both small-to-moderately-sized and large prostates are similar and sustainable at 2 yr of follow-up.

Evolution of Day-Case Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate Success Rate Over Time

Objectives: To describe the evolution of day-case success rate over the years and to identify predictive factors for prolonged hospitalization or readmissions. Methods: Retrospective review of all consecutive day-case holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) performed by a single surgeon between January 2013 and February 2019 using a prospective database. Day-case success was defined as discharge within less than 12 hours from admission without any readmission within 48 hours after discharge. Protocol for day-case treatment included systematic bladder catheter insertion with continuous irrigation for ∼2 hours and catheter removal on postoperative day 1. Patients were reached by phone on postoperative day 1 to ensure voiding. For the descriptive statistics, an analysis of variance was performed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify risk factors. Results: A total of 266 patients were retrieved and dispatched as follows: group 1 (n = 88) from January 2013 to July 2015, group 2 (n = 89) from August 2015 to June 2017, and group 3 (n = 89) from July 2017 to February 2019. The overall success rate was 80.5% (214/266) over the study period. It significantly improved over time from 70% in group 1 to 84% in group 2 and 87% in group 3 (p = 0.014). In the meantime, the operating time and the total energy delivered to the tissue decreased from 77 minutes in the first group to 60.4 minutes in the second group and 55.4 minutes in the third group (p < 0.001), and from 95.2 kJ in the first group to 84 kJ in the second group and 77.9 kJ in the third group (p = 0.041). On multivariate analysis, the only risk factor significantly associated with day-case failure was prostate volume greater than 90 cc (odds ratio = 2.041, p = 0.047). Conclusion: Day-case HoLEP is a reliable and safe procedure with a high success rate. The surgeon's experience seems to be crucial to improve perioperative outcomes, but prostate volume greater than 90 cc remains associated with higher failure rates.

[Surgical and interventional management of benign prostatic obstruction: Guidelines from the Committee for Male Voiding Disorders of the French Urology Association]

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Committee (CTMH) of the French Urology Association was to propose an update of the guidelines for surgical and interventional management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

METHODS

All available data published on PubMed® between 2018 and 2020 were systematically searched and reviewed. All papers assessing surgical and interventional management of adult patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) were included for analysis. After studies critical analysis, conclusions with level of evidence and French guidelines were elaborated in order to answer the predefined clinical questions.

RESULTS/GUIDELINES

Offer a trans-uretral incision of the prostate to treat patients with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) with a prostate volume<30cm³, without a middle lobe. TUIP increases the chances of preserving ejaculation. Propose mono- or bipolar trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to treat patients with moderate to severe LUTS with a prostate volume between 30 and 80cm³. Vaporization by Greenlight™ or by bipolar energy can be offered as an alternative to TURP. Offer a Greenlight™ laser vaporization to patients at risk of bleeding. Offer endoscopic prostate enucleation to surgically treat patients with moderate to severe LUTS as an alternative to TURP and open prostatectomy (OP). Minimally invasive prostatectomy is an alternative to OP in centers without access to adequate endoscopic procedures. Embolization of the prostatic arteries may be offered in the event of a contraindication or refusal of surgery for prostates with a volume>80cm³. Prostatic uretral lift is an alternative in patients interested in preserving their ejaculatory function and with a prostate volume<70cm³ without a middle lobe. Aquablation and Rezum™ are under evaluation and should be offered in research protocols.

CONCLUSION

Major changes in surgical management of BPO have occurred and aim at reducing morbidity and improving quality of life of patients.

The Learning Curves for Laser Application in Urology Procedures: Review of the Literature

Introduction: Currently, a laser is a popular technology in urological surgeries. The important laserrelated issue is the time when a surgeon reaches an acceptable level of safety and efficacy using laser technology. Methods: In this review, we aimed to assess the learning curves of three types of surgeries in urology, including photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP), holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and retrograde intra-renal surgeries (RIRSs). Here, we searched Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and Scopus for such keywords as Urology, laser, laser vaporization, prostate, nephrolithiasis, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and learning curve. Results: We evaluated 14 studies about PVP, 17 about RIRS, and 29 studies about HoLEP. Also, we separately discussed the learning curves of these three kinds of surgeries in detail. Conclusion: All the urologists, even expert surgeons, should attend a formal training course and have a skilled tutor present at their first cases.

Perioperative outcomes and cost of robotic vs open simple prostatectomy in the modern robotic era: results from the National Inpatient Sample

OBJECTIVES

To perform a comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes and hospitalisation cost between open (OSP) and robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) in the contemporary robotic era.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The NIS was queried for cases of OSP and RASP for the treatment of BPH between 2013 and 2016. Perioperative complications, unadjusted hospital cost and length of stay (LOS) were compared between RASP and OSP. Smoothed linear regression curves comparing hospitalisation cost by increasing LOS was stratified by surgical approach to identify point of cost equivalency between RASP and OSP. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to construct a hospitalisation cost model to examine the contribution of the robotic approach and LOS to hospitalisation cost.

RESULTS

The total analytical cohort included 2551 OSP and 704 RASP procedures. Patients undergoing RASP were younger, at a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 68 (63-73) vs 71 (65-77) years, and with less comorbidity (76.8% vs 86.5%, P < 0.01). RASP was associated with fewer total complications (11.1% vs 29.2%, P < 0.01) and a greater likelihood of routine discharge to home rather than another facility (88.9% vs 76.7%, P < 0.01). While LOS was shorter with RASP (median [IQR], 2 [1-3] vs 4 [3-6] days, P < 0.01), total unadjusted hospitalisation cost (in United States dollars) was greater (median [IQR], $10 855 [$7965-$15 675] vs $13 467 [$10 572-$17 722], P < 0.01). Presence of any complication increased both LOS and hospitalisation cost (P < 0.01). Linear regression modelling determined the point of cost equivalence between RASP staying a median of 2 days was an OSP case staying between 5 and 6 days. On multivariable regression analysis, the robotic approach contributed an additional $6175 (P < 0.01) to the cost model, whereas each additional day of hospitalisation contributed $1687 (P < 0.01), suggesting LOS would need to be 3-4 days shorter with RASP to offset surgical costs of the robot.

CONCLUSIONS

While RASP appears to have significantly better perioperative complication rates with shorter LOS and likely discharge to home, total hospitalisation cost remained greater, likely related to upfront operative costs. While this retrospective study is limited by selection bias for patients undergoing RASP, the benefits of improved convalescence, discharge to home, and lower rate of perioperative complications appear to justify performance of RASP in an experienced pelvic robotic centre despite relatively greater hospitalisation cost if referral to an experienced holmium laser enucleation of the prostate centre is not feasible.

Efficacy and Safety of Surgery for Benign Prostatic Obstruction in Patients with Preoperative Urinary Catheter

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) surgery in patients with preoperative urinary catheterization. Patients and Methods: We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective study including all patients who failed a trial without catheter (TWOC) after acute urinary retention (AUR) between January 2017 and January 2019. Patients with neurogenic bladder, prostate cancer, or urethral stricture were excluded from the analysis. Patients underwent either monopolar/bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP), prostate artery embolization (PAE), open prostatectomy (OP), or endoscopic enucleation. The primary endpoint was 12-month urinary catheter-free survival without using benign prostatic hyperplasia medications. Results: One hundred seventy-one consecutive men (median age: 71 years; median prostate volume: 75 cm³) underwent BPO surgery, including 48 (28%) TURP, 62 (36.3%) PVP, 21 (12.3%) endoscopic enucleation, 15 (8.8%) PAE, and 25 (14.6%) OP. The median duration of preoperative urinary catheterization was 69 days (interquartile range 46-125). The 12-month urinary catheter-free survival rate was 84.8% (145/171). Satisfactory voiding returned to 121 patients (70.8%). On backward stepwise multivariable analysis, PVP (odds ratio [OR] 0.27 [0.10-0.69]; p = 0.008), PAE (OR 5.27 [1.28-27.75]; p = 0.03), endoscopic enucleation (OR 0.08 [0-0.49]; p = 0.023), OP (OR 0.10 [0.01-0.57]; p = 0.034), Charlson score (OR 1.36 [1.14-1.66]; p = 0.001), and number of preoperative TWOC failure (OR 2.53 [1.23-5.51]; p = 0.014) were significantly associated with catheter-free survival. Conclusions: In this multi-institutional retrospective study, including patients with preoperative catheterization, the overall success rate of BPO surgery was 70.8% after 1-year follow-up. Compared with TURP, enucleation methods and PVP were associated with better catheter-free survival, whereas PAE was associated with higher risk of AUR recurrence.

Systematic review of the endoscopic enucleation of the prostate learning curve

INTRODUCTION

It has been shown that endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) allows for similar efficacy and safety, no matter what energy and type of instruments we use, but the length of learning may differ greatly. The aim of this systematic review is to verify if there is any significant difference between EEP methods in learning.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a systematic literature search in three databases and included only the articles containing their own data on the EEP learning curve assessment during the last 10 years. The primary endpoint was to determine the necessary experience needed to achieve a plateau. The secondary endpoints were to review methods used to evaluate a learning curve.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The final sample included 17 articles, containing a total of 4615 EEPs performed by 76 surgeons, the most common method was HoLEP (9/17). The majority of articles studying HoLEP report a learning curve of experience level achievement in roughly 30-40 (min 20; max 60) cases. The studies of GreenLight laser showed high heterogeneity in the results with minimum of 20 cases and maximum of 150-200 cases. TUEB required roughly 40-50 cases to reach the plateau.

CONCLUSION

Although EEP is considered challenging, it shows a steep learning curve with a plateau after 30-50 cases. Proper criteria are critical for accurate assessment of the learning curve. The Trifecta and Pentafecta criteria are currently the most appropriate method to evaluate EEP learning.

Introduction of a New Score to Assess Surgical Efficiency in Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate

INTRODUCTION

While holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is accepted as safe and efficient, a long learning curve is considered the main reason for its slow adoption in clinical practice. So far, no standardized and easy-to-use parameter has been implemented to measure surgical experience or efficiency which could be useful for training and quality control purposes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the learning curves of 2 HoLEP beginners and to identify applicable efficiency outcome measures as well as potentially complicating factors in performing HoLEP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 594 patients treated by HoLEP between September 2016 and May 2019 were enrolled. The procedures were initially performed by 1 HoLEP expert (reference surgeon); over time, 2 further surgeons were trained. Baseline characteristics, enucleation weight, morcellation and enucleation time, laser energy usage, and postoperative results were recorded prospectively. The learning curves of the 2 novices were analyzed and compared to the reference surgeon. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors for postoperative grade ≥2 complications.

RESULTS

Median enucleation ratio and complication rates did not significantly alter along the learning curves. Median enucleation speed and laser energy application of the 2 novices significantly improved with growing experience. Combining these variables, we introduced the "HoLEP efficiency score" (HES) which demonstrated the most appropriate value to reflect the surgical experience and efficiency. The median HES for the reference surgeon was 82.8 min kJ/g. For the 2 novices, a drop from 130 and 124.4 min kJ/g by -57 and -30%, respectively, was observed. Among several tested clinical parameters, the presence of prostate cancer (p = 0.047) and the surgical caseload (p < 0.001) influenced the HES. On multivariable logistic regression, American Society of Anesthesiologists score and prostate cancer were independent predictors for grade ≥2 complications (p = 0.002, odds ratio [OR] 2.042 and p = 0.038, OR 1.940).

CONCLUSION

We introduce the HES as an objective and measurable tool to quantify surgical efficiency. In clinical practice, the HES may find application in training and quality control purposes as well as in comparing surgical modifications and hardware. Patients with prostate cancer seem to be more challenging cases and have a higher risk for complications, and may preferably be treated by experienced surgeons.

En bloc GreenLight laser enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP): An in-depth look at the anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using a 532-nm lithium triborate laser

GreenLight laser enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP) is an alternative endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) technique for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). GreenLEP is an 'en bloc' EEP technique to remove the transitional zone tissue in one piece. The procedure is a combination of laser enucleation and blunt gentle mechanical dissection using the tip of the resectoscope. The advantage of mechanical dissection is that it allows for better visualisation of the capsule and in some cases makes the dissection a little faster. This procedure is performed with a 532-nm lithium triborate laser (GreenLight™ XPS 180 W generator, AMS), a 2090 side-firing fibre and a Piranha™ morcellator (Richard Wolf GmbH). We offer a review of the evolution of the technique including the most important technical aspects, complications, advantages/disadvantages, tips and tricks and a visual step by step guide to perform the GreenLEP technique. GreenLEP is one of the latest energy sources reported in the armamentarium of EEP techniques for the treatment of BPO. GreenLEP has previously demonstrated its feasibility, safety and similar short- to mid-term functional outcomes compared to surgical gold standards in the literature.

The New American Urological Association Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Clinical Guidelines: 2019 Update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this paper was to analyze the efficacy of the current modalities available to surgically treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

RECENT FINDINGS

There have been significant surgical advancements for the treatment of BPH, including an increasing development and utilization of minimally invasive surgical techniques (MISTs). These procedures have varying outcomes that are critical to understand. In addition, MISTs have important adverse effects, though have minimized effects on sexual function when compared to more invasive surgical techniques. It is important for all urologists to be familiar with the surgical techniques available to treat BPH and the updated American Urological Association (AUA) Guidelines. Further studies evaluating efficacy, safety, and sexual functioning will help guide care in the future and evolve practice.

Sexual outcomes of endoscopic enucleation of prostate

The emergence of various endoscopic enucleation techniques in the past decade has provided surgeons with more options and opportunities in performing enucleation. With the same surgical principle as holmium laser enucleation of prostate, the early results of different techniques were comparable. However, sexual outcomes of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) were less commonly reported than the voiding and urodynamic outcomes. In this review, the sexual outcomes including erectile function, ejaculatory and orgasmic function of various endoscopic enucleation technique would be studied. The overall sexual outcomes were heterogeneous and inconclusive. Outcomes measurement, sample size calculation, hypothesis generation and selection criteria were not specifically designed for sexual outcomes or even available. There were also limitations in the individual sexual assessment tools. Nonetheless, most studies showed no significant deterioration of erectile function after EEP, and ejaculation dysfunction was common. Looking forward in the field of benign prostatic enlargement surgery, the 'one size fits all' notion should be abandoned. Treatment should be tailor-made according to the prostate size, co-morbidities and sexual needs. The sexual outcomes of enucleation have to be better studied and defined. More prospective controlled studies focusing primarily on sexual functions are needed. For enucleation surgeons, exploring different ejaculatory-sparing technique could be the golden opportunities in further consolidating the role and expanding the indication of enucleation surgery.

GreenLight Laser photoselective vapo-enucleation of the prostate with front-firing emission versus plasmakinetic resection of the prostate for benign prostate hyperplasia

Background

Although the conventional, monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has proven to be an effective and relatively safe treatment for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), many new endoscopic technologies have been introduced to treat BPH. With the development of laser, there are several alternative transurethral procedures embracing laser therapies. Herein, this study sought to explore the efficacy, safety and follow-up of GreenLight laser photoselective vapo-enucleation of the prostate (PVEP) with front-firing emission compared with plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) used to surgically manage BPH.

Methods

Data from patients who underwent either GreenLight laser PVEP or PKRP were retrospectively collected from March 2013 to May 2018. Perioperative data from both groups were compared.

Results

Totally, 43 and 45 patients were included in the PVEP and PKRP groups, respectively. No significant difference was observed in excision efficiency ratio (resected prostate weight/operation time) between the two groups (P=0.372). The efficiency ratio of the first 20 PVEP procedures (0.36±0.09 g/min) was significantly lower than that of the second 23 PVEP procedures (0.45±0.18 g/min) (P=0.042). The PVEP group experienced a shorter duration of catheterization, postoperative hospital stay and irrigation time than the PKRP group (P<0.001, P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P=0.937) in terms of overall postoperative complications. Three months after surgery, the international prostate symptoms (IPSS) score, quality of life (QOL) score, postvoid residual (PVR) volume and maximum urinary flow rate (Q_max) were decreased in both groups (P<0.001 for all) and were comparable between both groups (P=0.635, 0.662, 0.671 and 0.924, respectively).

Conclusions

GreenLight laser PVEP with front-firing emission was safe and effective modality in treating patients with BPH with short-term follow-up. PVEP was associated with shorter catheterization and postoperative hospital stay time compared with PKRP.

Lasers in Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate-Do We Really Need Them

The acronym EEP, coding for transurethral Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate, was introduced in 2016 by the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines panel on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Since then, a laser-based treatment, Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP), and the current-based treatment of bipolar enucleation of the prostate (BipoLEP) are equally appreciated as valuable options for the management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). This was mainly inspired by the results of two meta-analyses on randomized controlled trials, comparing open prostatectomy with either Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) or bipolar enucleation of the prostate (BipoLEP). Prior to that, HoLEP was embraced as the only valid option for transurethral enucleation, although evidence for equivalence existed as early as 2006, but was not recognized due to a plethora of acronyms for bipolar energy-based treatments and practiced HoLEP-centrism. On the other hand, the academic discourse focused on different (other) laser approaches that came up, led by Thulium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Tm:YAG) Vapoenucleation (ThuVEP) in 2009 and, finally, transurethral anatomical enucleation with Tm:YAG support (thulium laser enucleation of the prostate, ThuLEP) in 2010. Initially, the discourse on lasers focused on the different properties of lasers rather than technique or surgical anatomy, respectively. In and after 2016, the discussion ultimately moved towards surgical technique and accepting anatomical preparation as the common of all EEP techniques (AEEP). Since then, the unspoken question has been raised, whether lasers are still necessary to perform EEP in light of existing evidence, given the total cost of ownership (TCO) for these generators. This article weighs the current evidence and comes to the conclusion that no evidence of superiority of one modality over another exists with regard to any endpoint. Therefore, in the sense of critical importance, AEEP can be safely and effectively performed without laser technologies and without compromise.

Transurethral anatomical enucleation of the prostate with Tm:YAG support (ThuLEP): Evolution and variations of the technique. The inventors' perspective

After its introduction, transurethral anatomical enucleation of the prostate with Tm:YAG support (ThuLEP) has evolved as one of the standard techniques of transurethral anatomical endoscopic enucleations of the prostate. Growing evidence has proven ThuLEP as an alternative for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction caused by benign prostatic enlargement and has been acknowledged by the EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, incl. Benign Prostatic Obstruction. The uniqueness of ThuLEP as a concept made it a blueprint for other laser and nonlaser enucleating techniques based on the emphasis on two principles: widely blunt anatomical dissection and demystification of energy sources as being secondary for transurethral enucleation. The original technique has been technically refined by the inventor and other working groups in the field. The evolutionary modifications followed the academic discourse on anatomical enucleation for measures to prevent early postoperative stress urinary incontinence and preservation of antegrade ejaculation. Variations of the original three-lobe dissection technique were introduced with two-lobe approach or en bloc dissection. The manuscript is accompanied by an instructional video and surgical atlas on the currently most commonly applied two-lobe technique.

Mind the Gaps: Adoption and Underutilization of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate in the United States from 2008 to 2014

Purpose: There is increasing recognition of the advantages of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) treatment in the United States but relatively little is known about the extent of HoLEP adoption over time. This study aims to assess national HoLEP adoption rates and regional trends from 2008 to 2014. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a data set of 100% Medicare claims to determine the rate of U.S. HoLEP adoption in 2008, 2011, and 2014. Rates were adjusted by age and race and stratified by hospital referral region (HRR). Linear and logistic regression models were used to assess for trends in HoLEP adoption over time. Results: Total U.S. BPH cases decreased 24% from 2008 to 2014 and HoLEP cases increased significantly from 1086 (2008) to 3368 (2014). Despite this, HoLEP accounted for just 4% of total BPH cases in 2014. In 2008, 28/306 (9%) of HRRs recorded >10 HoLEP cases per year. This increased to 89 HRRs (29%) in 2011 but stabilized at 94 HRRs (31%) in 2014. In 2014, over 50% of states still had only 0 to 1 sites doing 10+ HoLEP cases per year. Conclusions: Based on this 100% sample of Medicare claims from 2008 to 2014, surgical BPH treatment volume has decreased, while HoLEP volume and regional adoption have tripled. However, rates of HoLEP remain extremely low at just 4% of all BPH procedures in 2014, and large regional gaps in care exist. These data indicate that HoLEP remains substantially underutilized and the majority of regions still lack access to centers performing >10 HoLEP cases per year.

Complications of anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate

Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the 'gold standard' for surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Recently, anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) using holmium laser, thulium laser and plasma, etc., is extensively applied in clinical practice. However, perioperative complications of AEEP are inevitable in spite of lower incidence compared with TURP. This study reviewed the literature related to the aetiology, prevention and treatment of common complications of AEEP, which would contribute to the diagnosis and treatment of BPO.

En-bloc endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the gold standard for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Yet, the introduction of lasers for the treatment of LUTS due to BPO has dramatically changed the surgical landscape of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) treatment. Recently, "en-bloc" techniques have shown to prove advantageous in terms of better visualization, more prompt identification of the surgical capsule and the correct plane to dissect. Herein we provide a comprehensive overview of available series of en-bloc enucleation of the prostate, focusing on surgical techniques, perioperative and functional outcomes.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review of the literature was performed according to PRISMA recommendations and was conducted on surgical techniques and perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive en-bloc surgery for prostate adenoma detachment.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Overall, 16 studies with 2750 patients between 2003 and 2019 were included. Specific technical nuances have been described to maximize perioperative outcomes of en-bloc prostatic enucleation, including early apical release, horse-shape incisions, inverted U-shape tractions and low power. Overall, regardless of the energy employed, en-bloc prostatic enucleation achieved favorable outcomes including low risk of major complications and quality of life improvement. However, a great heterogeneity of study design, patients' inclusion criteria, prostate volume and en-bloc surgical strategy was found.

CONCLUSIONS

En-bloc endoscopic enucleation of the prostate has been shown to be technically feasible and safe, with potential technical advantages over the classic three-lobe technique. Larger comparative studies are needed to evaluate the ultimate impact of the en-bloc approach on postoperative outcomes, in light of the surgeon's learning curve.

How much energy do we need to ablate 1 mm3 of stone during Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy? An in vitro study

INTRODUCTION

Holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) is currently the gold standard for lithotripsy for the treatment of all known urinary stone types. Stone composition and volume are major determinants of the lithotripsy. This in vitro study evaluated the required energy to ablate 1 mm³ of various stone types with different laser settings using Ho:YAG.

METHODS

272 µm core-diameter laser fibers (Boston Scientific^©) were connected to a 30 Watt MH1 Ho:YAG generator (Rocamed®). An experimental setup consisting of immerged human stones of calcium oxalate monohydrate (COM), uric acid (UA) or cystine (Cys) was used with a single pulse lasing emission (0.6/0.8/1 J), in contact mode. Stones were dried out before three-dimensional scanning to measure ablation volume per pulse (AVP) and required energy to treat 1 mm³ (RE).

RESULTS

All settings considered, ablation volumes per pulse (AVP) for COM were significantly lower than those for UA and Cys (p = 0.002 and p = 0.03, respectively), whereas AVP for Cys was significantly lower than those for UA (p = 0.03). The mean REs at 0.6 J pulse energy (PE) for COM, Cys and UA were 34, 8.5 and 3.2 J, respectively The mean REs at 1 J PE for COM, Cys and UA were 14.7, 6.4 and 2 J, respectively. At 0.6 J PE, RE for COM was more than tenfold and fivefold higher than those for UA and Cys, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This in vitro study shows for the first time a volumetric evaluation of Ho:YAG efficiency by the ablation volume per pulse on human stone samples, according to various pulse energies. The REs for COM, UA and Cys should be considered in clinical practice.

Our clinic's first experience with HoLEP

OBJECTIVE:

The present study reports a retrospective evaluation of the first Holmium laser prostate enucleation (HoLEP) cases and their results in our clinic.

METHODS:

Twenty four patients who underwent HoLEP surgery between April 2017 and November 2017 were evaluated for demographic characteristics, duration of operation, amount of hemorrhage, amount of energy used, tissue weight removed, catheterization time and complications. IPSS and uroflowmetry results were compared before and after the surgery.

RESULTS:

Patients with hemoglobin, IPSS, uroflowmetry, and voiding speeds (Qmean, Qmax) were compared before and after the surgery. There was a significant difference in IPSS, Qmean and hemoglobin values but not in Qmax, statistically. Our complications rates were correlated with the literature.

CONCLUSION:

HoLEP stands out as a surgical method that can be applied with high confidence in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia and it has similar functional results to gold standard surgeries, causes fewer complications, improves patient comfort due to short catheterization and hospitalization and is more advantageous regarding cost.

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Endoscopic Surgical Procedures in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Comparison Between Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate, GreenLight Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate, and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate

Purpose: The main objective of this multicentric retrospective pilot study was to evaluate the 1-year follow-up safety (i.e., minor [Clavien-Dindo I-II] and major [Clavien-Dindo ≥III] complications) of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (GL PVP), and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) performed after kidney transplantation (KT). The secondary objectives were to evaluate the efficacy and to assess the impact of these procedures on graft function. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively included all KT recipients who underwent a HoLEP or GL PVP or TURP for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in three French university centers. Results: From January 2013 to April 2018, 60 BPH endoscopic surgical procedures in KT recipients were performed: 17 HoLEP (HoLEP group), 9 GL PVP (GL PVP group), and 34 TURP (TURP group). Age, body mass index, preoperative serum creatinine, preoperative International Prostatic Symptom Score, preoperative Q_max, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, medical history of acute urinary retention (AUR), urinary tract infection (UTI), and indwelling urethral catheter were similar in all study groups. Mean preoperative prostate volume was higher in HoLEP group. The rate of overall postoperative complications was statistically higher in the HoLEP group (11/17 [64.7%] vs 1/9 [11.1%] vs 12/34 [35.3%] in HoLEP group, GL PVP group, and TURP group, respectively, p = 0.02), with higher rate of long-term UTI and AUR. Q_max improved in all groups after operation. Delta postoperative month 12-preoperative serum creatinine was similar in the all groups. Conclusions: Although our study is underpowered, the rate of postoperative complications is higher with HoLEP procedure, in comparison with GL PVP, for the treatment of BPH after KT. One-year efficacy is similar in HoLEP, GL PVP, and TURP groups. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our results.