Does Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate Need New Lasers? Current Perspective on New Laser Devices

Evaluation of the learning curve for Thulium fiber laser enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP): retrospective study of a single-surgeon experience in real-world settings

PURPOSE

To assess the learning curve of Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP) of a single surgeon inexperienced in laser endoscopic enucleation of prostate (EEP).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients with benign prostate hyperplasia undergoing ThuFLEP at our center between January 2022 and August 2023 by one surgeon. Inclusion criteria were International Prostate Symptom Score > 7, prostate volume < 200 g, and maximal urinary flow rate < 15 mL/s. The surgeon was inexperienced in laser EEP and trained by watching educational videos of ThuFLEP before starting to perform the procedure under mentoring during the first 4 cases. Procedural data (enucleation and morcellation efficiency, complications) and functional results up to 3 months were evaluated. Patients were divided into 4 cohorts of 20 consecutive cases to evaluate outcomes evolution throughout time.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 69.9 years (SD 7.8) and mean prostate volume was 89.9 g (SD 25.8). Preoperative functional parameters were comparable between the groups. Mean enucleation efficiency (EE) ratio and morcellation efficiency (ME) ratio reached respectively 0.78 g/min (SD 0.55) and 2.49 g/min (SD 1.03) and both variables significantly increased from group 1 to group 3 (p < 0,001). Perioperative complications remained low throughout the caseload with similar significant 3-month functional improvements between all groups.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to evaluate ThuFLEP learning curve for a single surgeon inexperienced in laser EEP with limited mentoring. Under these real-world conditions, nearly 60 cases were needed to complete the learning curve with a complications rate remaining low throughout the training process.

Predicting the risk of failed trial without catheter following Rezum™ therapy

PURPOSE

Convective water vapor thermal therapy or "Rezum™" treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostate hypertrophy require postoperative catheterization to avoid acute urinary retention. Unsuccessful catheter removal is still unpredictable. We, therefore, aimed to identify the risk factors of failed initial trial without catheter (TWOC) after Rezum™ therapy inside a large cohort of patients.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on patients who underwent Rezum™ therapy by three referent urologists across two academic hospitals between January 2022 and January 2023. A Foley catheter was systematically placed after therapy for 7 days in all patients before TWOC. Patients characteristics [age, imagery, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR)], and treatment outcomes (International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), adverse events) were analyzed at baseline and 3 months from procedure. Failed initial TWOC was defined as the incapacity to pass urine or measured PVR > 300 mL. After univariate selection, the risk factors for TWOC failure were identified using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

216 patients qualified for analysis with 23 (10.6%) failing the first TWOC after 7 days of catheterization. After multivariate logistic regression, only preoperative PVR predicted TWOC failure (OR 1.01; p = 0.007). The cut-off of preoperative PVR increasing this risk was 120 mL (p = 0, 02).

CONCLUSION

Over 10% of men undergoing Rezum™ therapy for LUTS/BPH will experience TWOC failure and AUR after 7 days of catheterization. Preoperative PVR seems to be the only independent risk factor of unsuccessful catheter removal.

Network Meta-Analysis of the Treatment Safety and Efficacy of Different Lasers in Prostate Enucleation

Purpose: This study aimed to compare different laser systems for the enucleation of benign prostate hyperplasia. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on different lasers for prostate enucleation were searched from PubMed, Embase, and CNKI databases. Pairwise and network meta-analyis (NMA) were performed to analyze the outcome regarding surgery time, complications, short-term postvoid residual (PVR), long-term PVR, and short-term international prostate symptom score (IPSS), long-term IPSS, short-term maximum urine flow rate (Qmax), and long-term Qmax. RevMan software was used for paired meta-analysis. Considering the variance uncertainty caused by the different source regions of RCTs and the different primary conditions of surgeons and patients, this study uses Bayesian NMA conducted with ADDIS software to compare different treatment methods indirectly. Node-splitting analysis was used to test inconsistency for closed-loop indirect comparison. Results: Nine studies were included in this study, involving four types of lasers: diode laser, holmium laser, thulium laser, and greenlight laser. In safety paired meta-analysis, holmium laser could bring more complication risk than thulium laser (odds ratio: 2.70, 95% confidential interval [CI]: 1.79-4.00, p < 0.001), and no other significant result was detected. In the efficacy comparisons, holmium laser could offer better postoperative long-term PVR (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.35, 95%CI: -0.62, -0.09, p = 0.011), better postoperative long-term IPSS (SMD: -0.30, 95%CI: -0.57, -0.04, p = 0.011), better postoperative short-term Qmax (SMD: 0.44, 95%CI: 0.17, 0.70, p = 0.001) compared with greenlight laser. According to the results of NMA, greenlight laser may bring more complication risks when applied to prostate enucleation than the other three lasers. Thulium laser may be the recommended laser system for prostate enucleation. Conclusion: Thulium laser may be the recommended laser system since it can bring less complication risk with comparable efficacy. More RCTs are still needed to validate this study.