Safety and Efficacy of Eraser Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: Preliminary Report

The safety and efficacy of five surgical treatments in prostate enucleation: a network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of our study was to investigate the comparative outcomes of five different energy types on surgical efficacy and postoperative recovery in patients with benign prostate hyperplasia.

METHODS

The literature was systematically reviewed on December 1st, 2023, encompassing studies retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases that incorporated clinical studies of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), Thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP), transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate (PKEP), diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) and thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) in the treatment of prostatic hyperplasia. Two independent reviewers extracted study data and conducted quality assessments using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Network meta-analysis (NMA) was employed to indirectly analyze the outcomes of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) techniques.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 38 studies, comprising 21 non-randomized controlled trials (nRCTs) and 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), incorporating five distinct techniques: holmium laser, Thulium:YAG laser, bipolar plasma, diode laser and thulium fiber laser. In comparing treatment durations, ThuLEP and HoLEP had shorter overall hospital stays than PKEP, while the enucleation time of ThuLEP and HoLEP was shorter than that of ThuFLEP. Moreover, the enucleation tissue weight of both thulium fiber laser and holmium laser was heavier than bipolar plasma. However, the analysis did not reveal any statistically significant variation in complications among the various types of enucleation. In postoperative follow-up, the IPSS at 3 months post-operation was superior in the Thulium:YAG laser group compared to the holmium laser group. The thulium fiber laser technique demonstrated significant advantages over other enucleation methods in terms of QoL and PVR at 12 months after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Theoretical properties may vary among different energy sources; however, there are no discernible clinical differences in operation-related parameters, postoperative complications, and postoperative follow-up. Therefore, the choice of laser does not significantly impact the outcome. However, due to the limited number of included studies, future research should focus on larger sample sizes and multicenter investigations to further validate the findings of this study.

Bladder neck stenosis after transurethral prostate surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Bladder neck stenosis (BNS) is a long-term complication of surgical procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). We performed a systematic literature review and a meta-analysis of the incidence of BNS after transurethral procedures for BPH.

METHODS

We performed a systemic literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Controlled Register of Trials. We accepted only randomized trials comparing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) vs. other transurethral surgery for BPH that were grouped in Ablation vs. Enucleation modalities. The incidences of BNS were pooled using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Method with the random effect model and expressed as Risk Ratios, 95% Confidence Intervals, and p values. Study heterogeneity was assessed utilizing the I² value.

RESULTS

72 studies were identified for meta-analysis, 46 comparing TURP vs. Ablation and 26 TURP vs. Enucleation. The pooled incidence of BNS was 1.3% after TURP, 0.66% after enucleation and 1.2% after Ablation. The incidence of BNS was higher after TURP than after Enucleation but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.75 95% CI 0.81-3.79, p = 0.16). There was no significant heterogeneity among the studies (I² 0%, Chi² 4.11, p = 0.90). The incidence of BNS was higher after TURP than after Ablation, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.82-2.11, p = 0.26) with no significant heterogeneity (I² 0%, Chi² 21.1, p = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed no difference in the rate of BNS incidence among randomized trials comparing TURP vs. Ablation vs. Enucleation and can be used as a reference to counsel patients undergoing BPH surgery.

Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP). The same but different-a systematic review

Purpose

Various techniques for EEP exist. They differ by surgical steps and the source of energy. It is assumed that the latter is of minor importance, whereas adherence to the anatomical enucleation template determines the postoperative result. So far, no systematic review highlights the differences between the energy sources in use for anatomical EEP. This study will address selfsame topic.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was completed on September 1st, 2020. Studies comparing HoLEP, ThuLEP, DiLEP, or BipolEP with TUR-P providing 12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. Two frequentist network meta-analyses were created to compare the techniques of EEP indirectly.

Results

31 studies, including 4466 patients, were found eligible for our meta-analysis. Indirect pairwise comparison showed differences in surgery time between BipolEP and HolEP (MD − 16.72 min., 95% CI − 27.75 to − 5.69) and DiLEP and HoLEP (MD − 22.41 min., 95% CI − 39.43 to − 5.39). No differences in the amount of resected prostatic tissue, major and minor complications and postoperative catheterization time were found. The odds for blood transfusions were threefold higher for BipolEP than for HoLEP (OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.02–10.5). The difference was not statistically significant when comparing prospective trials and matched-pair analysis only (OR 3.25, 95% CI 0.94–11.18). The Qmax 12 months after surgery was 2 ml/sec. higher for BipolEP than for DiLEP (MD  2.00, 95% CI 0.17–3.84) and 1.94 ml/sec. lower for DiLEP than for HoLEP (MD − 1.94, 95% CI − 3.65 to − 0.22).

Conclusion

The energy source used for EEP has an impact on the intervention itself. BipolEP promotes surgical efficiency; laser techniques lower the risk of bleeding.

Registry

This meta-analysis is registered in the PROSPERO international prospective register registry with the registration number CRD42020205836.

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.

[Surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) in patients under anticoagulation: a review of the bleeding risks of established techniques]

BACKGROUND

In an aging society an increase of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) requiring treatment is to be expected and the proportion of patients with cardiovascular comorbidities under anticoagulation is also increasing. As the operative treatment of BPO can be problematic, the hemostatic effect of the techniques is of particular importance.

OBJECTIVE

This review article discusses the data situation on the bleeding risk of established surgical techniques and the statement of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines "EAU guidelines on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), incl. benign prostatic obstruction (BPO)" on this topic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data analysis from PubMed.

RESULTS

The EAU guidelines favor transurethral laser vaporization of the prostate using "greenlight", thulium or diode laser and laser enucleation using a holmium or thulium laser in this patient collective. The bipolar is superior to monopolar transurethral resection (TUR-P) in hemostasis. In the future bipolar enucleation of the prostate (BipoLEP) can be an alternative under good hemostasis. Bleeding is a rare complication after recently established minimally invasive techniques, such as Urolift®, I‑TIND© and Rezum™, the same applies to prostate artery embolization. Aqua-ablation/AquaBeam® seems to be unsuitable due to frequent hematuria. Surgical adenomectomy can be associated with a high risk of bleeding.

CONCLUSION

According to current data, transurethral laser vaporization and enucleation of the prostate are the treatment of choice for patients under anticoagulation; however, other transurethral techniques, such as BipoLEP have an acceptable risk of bleeding and can be an alternative depending on local resources. Newer minimally invasive approaches could become more important in the future.

Multivariate Analysis of the Failure of Removal of the Urinary Catheter within 48 Hours after Transurethral Enucleation and Resection of the Prostate

Objective

To assess the value of clinically relevant data for predicting the failure of removal of the urinary catheter within 48 hours after TUERP. Materials and Methods. We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 357 patients who underwent TUERP between January 2015 and July 2018, all of whom stopped bladder irrigation and removed urinary catheter within 48 hours after the operation. According to whether the removal of the catheter was successful, the patients were classified into 2 groups: Group A was successful and group B was a failure. Univariate analysis was performed to determine the association between the failure of removal of the catheter and the patients' preoperative clinical characteristics. Logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic analysis (ROC) were conducted to establish the prediction model. Then the area under the curve (AUC) and the cut-off value were calculated.

Results

357 patients were divided into group A (n = 305, 85.4%) and group B (n = 305, 85.4%) and group B (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (P=0.006), history of acute urinary retention (AUR) (

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that IPSS, QoL, drug medication, history of AUR, TPV, and IPP are independent factors associated with the failure of removal of the urethral catheter within 48 hours after TUERP.

Transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using a diode laser versus bipolar plasmakinetic for benign prostatic obstruction: a meta-analysis

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) versus bipolar plasma kinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A systematic literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CKNI databases to identify eligible studies published before April 2019. The quality of evidence and methodology was assessed. Primary outcomes were clinical and demographic characteristics and postoperative efficacy including maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR), quality of life (QoL), and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS); secondary outcomes were intraoperative variables and major complications. Meta-analyses of extracted data were performed with the RevMan version 5.2. The overall effects were determined by the Z-test, and a p value less than 0.05 was considered with significant difference. A fixed- or random-effect model was chosen to fit the pooled heterogeneity (determined by Chi-squared test and I²). As qualified trials were few, subgroup analyses were not performed. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 451 patients were enrolled in our meta-analysis. In the included trials, all the diode (wavelength at 980 nm and 1470 nm) lasers applied output at continuous wave mode; the energy settings ranged from 120 to 160 W for enucleation and 30 to 60 W for coagulation. DiLEP provided less perioperative hemoglobin decrease (MD = - 3.22; 95% CI (- 5.15, - 1.29); p = 0.001; I² = 65%), less postoperative catheterization time (MD = - 17.82; 95% CI (- 32.74, - 2.90); p = 0.02; I² = 96%), less postoperative irrigation time (MD = - 7.15; 95% CI (- 13.67, - 0.62); p = 0.03; I² = 98%), and lower incidence of urinary irritative symptoms (OR = 0.31; 95% CI (0.14, 0.67); p = 0.003; I² = 0%) compared with PKEP. During the 1, 3, 6, and 12-month postoperative follow-up, no statistically significant difference was found in Qmax, IPSS, QoL, and PVR between the procedures. As regards other perioperative and postoperative parameters and major complications, we found no significant difference. Both DiLEP and PKEP are safe and efficient methods for the treatment of BPH. However, DiLEP showed less perioperative hemoglobin decrease, less postoperative catheterization time, less postoperative irrigation time, and lower rates of postoperative irritative symptoms compared with the PKEP group.

Pyuria and Post-Operation Urinary Tract Infection after Diode Laser Vaporesection of the Prostate

Background: Monopolar transurethral resection of prostate (m-TURP) remains the gold standard for benign prostate obstruction (BPO). Recently developed laser surgical technique provides fewer peri-operative complications with equivalent outcomes. Diode laser vaporesection (DiLRP) offers better hemostasis, shorter catheterization duration, and shorter hospital stay, however, deep thermal penetration might cause prolonged prostatic urethra inflammation and subsequent complications. We conducted a retrospective study to compare the pyuria duration and post-operative urinary tract infection sequelae (POUTIs) between DiLRP and m-TURP. Methods: From July 2011 to September 2015, we retrieved medical records for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from prostate obstruction who underwent m-TURP and DiLRP. Demographic characteristics were recorded from a computerized database. The duration of pyuria after operation was compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis and risk factors were evaluated by Cox regression analysis. Results: One hundred twelve patients underwent DiLRP and 81 underwent m-TURP performed by the same surgeon during the same period. The mean age of the patients was 72 ± 7.3 years in the DiLRP group and 70 ± 7.6 years in the m-TURP group (p = 0.069). There was a higher percentage of anticoagulant used in the DiLRP group than in the m-TURP group (18.5% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.028). Operation time was longer but post-operative normal saline irrigation interval was shorter in DiLRP compared with m-TURP, respectively (62.8 ± 20.6 vs. 47.4 ± 22.1 minutes, p < 0.001; 2.1 ± 0.3 vs. 2.5 ± 0.9 days, p < 0.001). The post-operative infections were statistically significantly higher in the DiLRP group, including epididymitis (10.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.013) and POUTIs-related hospitalization (8.3% vs. 1.2%, p=0.031).The DiLRP resulted in longer pyuria period (16 vs. 12 weeks, p = 0.0014), with factors including operative method by DiLRP (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.828, p = 0.003) and age (HR: 0.665, p = 0.040). Conclusions: According to our study, DiLRP associated with more POUTIs is possibly caused by a longer pyuria period. Further larger prospective studies are necessary for the evaluation of the association between post-operative pyuria and POUTIs.

Outcome of 980 nm diode laser vaporization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A prospective study

Purpose

To evaluate the initial experience and outcome of photo-selective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in Pakistan with the use of a 980 nm diode laser.

Materials and Methods

A prospective study was performed from November 2016 to December 2017. A total of 100 patients diagnosed with bladder outlet obstruction secondary to BPH who planned for PVP were enrolled in the study. PVP was carried out with a diode laser at 980 nm (Biolitec Diode 180W laser) in a continuous wave with a 600 nm (twister) fiber. Baseline characteristics and perioperative data were compared. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), post void residual (PVR) and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) at 3 and 6 months after surgery.

Results

The mean age was 65.82±10.42, mean prostate size was 67.35±16.42, operative time was 55.85±18.01 and total energy was 198.68±49.12 kJ. At 3 months and 6 months, significant improvements were noted (p<0.001) in IPSS 7.04±1.69 (−18.92), Qmax 19.22±4.75 mL/s (+13.09) and and PVR 18.89±5.39 mL (−112.80). Most frequent problems were burning micturition (35%) and terminal dysuria (29%). No significant difference in postoperative hemoglobin was seen in patients who were on anti-platelet drugs.

Conclusions

PVP with a diode laser is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of BPH and is also safe in patients who are on anti-platelet agents.

Dual-centre randomized-controlled trial comparing transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using diode laser vs. bipolar plasmakinetic for the treatment of LUTS secondary of benign prostate obstruction: 1-year follow-up results

PURPOSE

Bipolar endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (BEEP) was recommended by the 2016 EAU guidelines as the first choice of surgical treatment in men with a substantially enlarged prostate and moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms. The main aim of this study was to compare a modified diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) to BEEP.

METHODS

A total of 114 patients with prostate (20-160 mL) were randomized 1:1 into either DiLEP or BEEP in a dual-centre, non-inferiority-design randomized-controlled trial. The primary outcomes included Q_max and IPSS at 12 months. Non-inferiority was evaluated by comparing the two-sided 95% CI for the mean differences of Q_max and IPSS. Secondary endpoints included other perioperative parameters, postoperative micturition variables, and complication rate.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients (97%) had completed the intent-to-treat analysis, The results showed that DiLEP was comparable to BEEP regarding Q_max (28.0 ± 7.0 vs. 28.1 ± 7.2 mL/s) and IPSS (3.0 ± 2.2 vs. 2.9 ± 2.6) at 12 months, the non-inferiority was met for both Q_max and IPSS. There were also no significant difference between two groups regarding tissue removal rate (71.8 vs. 73.8%), hemoglobin decrease (0.33 ± 0.66 vs. 0.36 ± 0.75 g/dL), sodium decrease (1.0 ± 2.7 vs. 0.3 ± 2.9 mmol/L), and Clavien III complications (5.3 vs. 1.8%) at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This DiLEP is an anatomical endoscopic enucleation technique for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia, it is non-inferior to BEEP regarding Q_max and IPSS at 12 months postoperatively.

A prospective, randomized trial comparing thulium vapoenucleation with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction: perioperative safety and efficacy

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the perioperative outcomes of thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for patients with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

METHODS

Forty-eight and 46 patients were prospectively randomized to ThuVEP and HoLEP. All patients were assessed preoperatively and 4-week postoperatively. The complications were noted and classified according to the modified Clavien classification system. Patient data were expressed as median (interquartile range) or numbers (%).

RESULTS

Median age at surgery was 73 (67-76) years and median prostate volume was 80 (46.75-100) cc and not different between the groups (p = 0.207). The median operative time was 60 (41-79) minutes without significant differences between both groups (p = 0.275). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding catheterization time [2 (2-2) days, p = 0.966] and postoperative stay [2 (2-3) days, p = 0.80]). Clavien 1 (13.8%), Clavien 2 (3.2%), Clavien 3a (2.1%), and Clavien 3b (4.3%) complications occurred without significant differences between the groups. However, the occurrence of acute postoperative urinary retention was higher after HoLEP compared to ThuVEP (15.2 vs. 2.1%, p ≤ 0.022). At 1-month follow-up, peak urinary flow rates (10.7 vs. 22 ml/s), post-void residual volumes (100 vs. 20 ml), International Prostate Symptom Score (20 vs. 10) and Quality of Life (4 vs. 3) had improved significantly (p ≤ 0.005) without significant differences between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ThuVEP and HoLEP are safe and effective procedures for the treatment of symptomatic BPO. Both procedures give equivalent and satisfactory immediate micturition improvement with low perioperative morbidity.

Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Larger than 100 ml: Simple Open Enucleation Versus Transurethral Laser Prostatectomy

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common causes of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in aging men. Over the age of 60, more than a half of men have BPH and/or bothersome LUTS. Contemporary guidelines advocate surgery as the standard of care for symptomatic BPH after failure of medical therapy, where the choice of the appropriate surgical procedure depends on the prostate size. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and simple open prostatectomy (OP) have been considered for decades the reference-standard techniques for men with prostate smaller and larger than 80 ml, respectively. However, both procedures are potentially associated with considerable perioperative morbidity which prompted the introduction of a variety of minimally invasive surgical techniques with comparable long-term outcomes compared to TURP and OP. Nevertheless, the management of prostates larger than 100 ml remains a clinical challenge. Transurethral anatomical enucleation of the prostate utilizing different laser energy represents an excellent alternative concept in transurethral BPH surgery. These procedures gained popularity and demonstrated similar outcomes to OP with the advantages of favorable morbidity profiles and shorter catheter time and hospital stay. Despite the fact that OP remains a viable treatment option for patients with bothersome LUTS secondary to very large prostates, this procedure has been to a large extent replaced by these emerging enucleation techniques. Given the advent of surgical alternatives, the current review presents an evidence-based comparison of the efficacy and safety profile of the currently available transurethral laser techniques with the standard OP for the management of BPH due to adenomas larger than 100 ml.

Bipolar transurethral vaporization: a superior procedure in benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective randomized comparison with bipolar TURP

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate (TUVP) with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a prospective randomized trial, 88 patients with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) underwent bipolar TUVP (N = 39) or bipolar TURP (N = 49) from October 2010 to November 2011. The inclusion criteria were age > 50 years, prostate volume of 30-80 mL, serum PSA < 4 ng/mL, IPSS ≥ 20, Qmax ≤ 10 mL/s and failed medical therapy. The perioperative and postoperative outcomes were evaluated and the IPSS and Qmax were assessed preoperatively and 3 months after procedure in all cases.

RESULTS

Both groups were similar in patient age, prostate volume, preoperative IPSS and Qmax. The TUVP group had significantly lower mean values of operative time, hospital stay, catheterization period, irrigation fluid volume and serum hemoglobin, creatinine, sodium and potassium changes compared with TURP group. No significant differences were seen between two groups regarding complications (TUVP = 10.3%; TURP = 12.2%) and modified Clavien classification of complications. No TUR syndrome, obturator reflex or epididymitis occurred in both groups. Re-hospitalization and transfusion due to clot retention (N = 2) and urethral stricture (N = 1) were reported only in the TURP group. Three patients experienced urinary retention after catheter removal in the TUVP group. Two patients were re-catheterized temporarily and one patient required repeat bipolar TUVP. Three months after surgery, two groups had significant improvement in IPSS and Qmax. But the TUVP group had significantly lower IPSS and higher Qmax than TURP group.

CONCLUSIONS

Bipolar TUVP is a safe, effective and low cost procedure among minimally invasive surgeries of BPH. Compared with bipolar TURP, the bipolar TUVP had similar complications, better perioperative and postoperative outcomes, superior hemostasis and higher efficacy.

Laparoscopic adenomectomy versus Eraser laser enucleation of the prostate

PURPOSE

To evaluate functional outcomes and morbidity rates after laparoscopic adenomectomy (LA) and Eraser laser enucleation of the prostate (ELEP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggesting bladder outlet obstruction, with a prostate heavier than 70 g on transrectal ultrasound, were selected to undergo laparoscopic adenomectomy or Eraser laser enucleation of the prostate. All patients were consecutively enrolled without randomization and assessed preoperatively, 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Baseline characteristics, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The total operating time was significantly longer in the LA group (138.8 ± 11.4 vs. 78.4 ± 10.0 min, p < 0.000001). Catheter removal was performed earlier (61.2 ± 21.3 vs. 174.0 ± 13.2 h, p < 0.000001) and the hospital stay was significantly shorter (62.4 ± 21.2 vs. 187.2 ± 12.6 h, p < 0.000001) in the ELEP group. The latter group experienced significantly less perioperative hemoglobin (Hb) loss (0.71 ± 0.25 vs. 2.15 ± 1.08 g/dl, p < 0.000001), and their postoperative Hb levels (14.1 ± 1.21 vs. 11.7 ± 1.31 g/dl, p < 0.000001) were significantly higher. The resected tissue was significantly greater in the LA group (58.5 ± 23.3 vs. 87.9 ± 22.4 g, p = 0.0002). Significant improvements in Qmax, Qol, and symptom scores from baseline to each follow-up time point were noted in both groups. No statistically significant difference in symptom scores or Qmax was registered between the LA and the ELEP group throughout the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic adenomectomy and ELEP were equally effective for relieving bladder outflow obstruction and lower urinary tract symptoms. The advantages of ELEP include less blood loss, shorter catheterization times, and shorter hospital stays.

Enucleation techniques for benign prostate obstruction: which one and why?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is the most advanced form of surgical management of benign prostate hyperplasia. The purpose of this review is to update the reader on various modalities currently in use, and in trial, for endoscopic enucleation.

RECENT FINDINGS

A recent paradigm shift has occurred for the proponents of electrosurgery technology to utilizes the advantages offered by laser enucleation with interest in bipolar enucleation. Holmium laser enucleation still has the greatest randomized evidence with the longest follow-up among all the various lasers used to perform enucleation.

SUMMARY

Randomized trials with longer follow-up are required to demonstrate whether nonholmium types of energy really have advantages in enucleation (speed, ease of use and hemostasis) and durability (decade plus) as compared to the holmium laser.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Functional Outcomes and Complications Following Transurethral Procedures for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Resulting from Benign Prostatic Obstruction: An Update

CONTEXT

A number of transurethral ablative techniques based on the use of innovative medical devices have been introduced in the recent past for the surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transurethral ablative procedures for BPO.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was performed for all RCTs comparing any transurethral surgical technique for BPO to another between 1992 and 2013. Efficacy was evaluated after a minimum follow-up of 1 yr based on International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum flow rate, and postvoid residual volume. Efficacy at midterm follow-up, prostate volume, perioperative data, and short-term and long-term complications were also assessed. Data were analyzed using RevMan software.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 69 RCTs (8517 enrolled patients) were included. No significant difference was found in terms of short-term efficacy between bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (B-TURP) and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP). However, B-TURP was associated with a lower rate of perioperative complications. Better short-term efficacy outcomes, fewer immediate complications, and a shorter hospital stay were found after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) compared with M-TURP. Compared with M-TURP, GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) was associated with a shorter hospital stay and fewer complications but no different short-term efficacy outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis shows that HoLEP is associated with more favorable outcomes than M-TURP in published RCTs. B-TURP and PVP have resulted in better perioperative outcomes without significant differences regarding efficacy parameters after short-term follow-up compared with M-TURP. Further studies are needed to provide long-term comparative data and head-to head comparisons of emerging techniques.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate, photovaporization of the prostate, and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate have shown efficacy outcomes comparable with conventional techniques yet reduce the complication rate. The respective role of these new options in the surgical armamentarium needs to be refined to propose tailored surgical treatment for benign prostatic obstruction relief.

Update on the use of diode laser in the management of benign prostate obstruction in 2014

AIM

To determine the status quo in respect of various diode lasers and present the techniques in use, their results and complications. We assess how these compare with transurethral resection of the prostate and other types of laser in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). When adequate RCTs were not available, case studies and reports were evaluated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Laser for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) has aroused the interest and curiosity of urologists as well as patients. The patient associates the term laser with a successful and modern procedure. The journey that started with coagulative necrosis of prostatic adenoma based on neodymium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser has culminated in endoscopic "enucleation" with holmium laser. Diode laser is being used in urology for about 10 years now. Various techniques have been employed to relieve bladder outlet obstruction due to BPH.

RESULTS

The diode laser scenario is marked by a diversity of surgical techniques and wavelengths. We summarize the current published literature in respect of functional results and complications.

CONCLUSION

More randomized controlled studies are needed to determine the position and the ideal technique of diode laser treatment for BPH.

Tissue effects resulting from eraser laser enucleation of the prostate: in vivo investigation

BACKGROUND/AIMS/OBJECTIVES: To describe the depth of the laser coagulation zone in vivo based on histological examinations and the functional outcome of a 1,318-nm diode laser for enucleation in benign prostatic enlargement (BPE).

METHODS

A total of 20 patients with BPE were treated by laser Eraser® enucleation of the prostate (ELEP). Prostatic tissue wedges were evaluated to assess the depth of the ELEP coagulation zones. Additionally, patients were assessed preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The coagulation zones were 0.36 ± 0.17 mm in epithelial tissue, 0.28 ± 0.15 mm in stromal tissue, and 0.25 ± 0.12 mm in mixed tissue. The coagulation area at the cutting edge completely sealed capillary vessels, reaching a depth of 0.35 ± 0.15 mm. The diameter of the coagulated vessels measured 1.75 ± 0.83 mm. Mean blood loss was 115.54 ± 93.12 ml, catheter time 1.35 ± 0.33 days, and hospital stay 1.89 ± 0.52 days. The International Prostate Symptom Score, maximal flow rate, and quality of life significantly improved 12 months after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

ELEP is safe and effective for BPE treatment and yields good results at a follow-up of 1 year. Because of the limited penetration depth, damage to the urinary sphincter is not expected.

EAU guidelines on the treatment and follow-up of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2013 version of the European Association of Urology guidelines on the treatment and follow-up of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted a literature search in computer databases for relevant articles published between 1966 and 31 October 2012. The Oxford classification system (2001) was used to determine the level of evidence for each article and to assign the grade of recommendation for each treatment modality.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Men with mild symptoms are suitable for watchful waiting. All men with bothersome LUTS should be offered lifestyle advice prior to or concurrent with any treatment. Men with bothersome moderate-to-severe LUTS quickly benefit from α1-blockers. Men with enlarged prostates, especially those >40ml, profit from 5α-reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) that slowly reduce LUTS and the probability of urinary retention or the need for surgery. Antimuscarinics might be considered for patients who have predominant bladder storage symptoms. The phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor tadalafil can quickly reduce LUTS to a similar extent as α1-blockers, and it also improves erectile dysfunction. Desmopressin can be used in men with nocturia due to nocturnal polyuria. Treatment with an α1-blocker and 5-ARI (in men with enlarged prostates) or antimuscarinics (with persistent storage symptoms) combines the positive effects of either drug class to achieve greater efficacy. Prostate surgery is indicated in men with absolute indications or drug treatment-resistant LUTS due to benign prostatic obstruction. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the current standard operation for men with prostates 30-80ml, whereas open surgery or transurethral holmium laser enucleation is appropriate for men with prostates >80ml. Alternatives for monopolar TURP include bipolar TURP and transurethral incision of the prostate (for glands <30ml) and laser treatments. Transurethral microwave therapy and transurethral needle ablation are effective minimally invasive treatments with higher retreatment rates compared with TURP. Prostate stents are an alternative to catheterisation for men unfit for surgery. Ethanol or botulinum toxin injections into the prostate are still experimental.

CONCLUSIONS

These symptom-oriented guidelines provide practical guidance for the management of men experiencing LUTS. The full version is available online (www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf/12_Male_LUTS.pdf).

[Surgical treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)]

Surgical treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) comprises a variety of treatment modalities. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered the gold standard. In the last decade various new techniques have emerged with encouraging functional results. However, long-term data are missing in order to evaluate the efficacy and safety. This review aims to describe new widely available techniques and to assess the underlying evidence.