Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) vs GreenLight photoselective vaporization of benign prostatic hyperplasia: analysis of BPH6 outcomes after 1 year of follow-up

Impact of Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia on Sexual Function: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Erectile Function and Ejaculatory Function

CONTEXT

Several sexual side effects, including erectile, ejaculatory, and orgasmic dysfunction, were reported with the majority of surgical procedures for benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review current evidence regarding the impact of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) surgery on sexual function.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive bibliographic search on the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was conducted in July 2021. The population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) model was used to define study eligibility. Studies were Included if they assessed patients with BPO and related lower urinary tract symptoms (P) undergoing BPH surgery (I) with or without a comparison between surgical treatments (C) evaluating the impact on sexual function (O). Retrospective and prospective primary studies were included. A pooled analysis was conducted on studies including the postoperative assessment of International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-5, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction (MSHQ-EjD; Function and/or Bother), or retrograde ejaculation (RE) rate (PROSPERO database ID: CRD42020177907).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 151 studies investigating 20 531 patients were included. Forty-eight randomized controlled trials evaluating 5045 individuals were eligible for the meta-analysis. In most studies (122, 80.8%), only erectile and/or ejaculatory function was evaluated. A substantial number of articles (67, 44.4%) also used nonvalidated tools to evaluate erectile and/or ejaculatory function. The pooled analysis showed no statistically significant changes in IIEF-5 score compared with baseline for the transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP; weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.76 pts; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.1, 1.62; p = 0.08), laser procedure (WMD 0.33 pts; 95% CI -0.1, 0.77; p = 0.13), and minimally invasive treatment (WMD -1.37 pts; 95% CI -3.19, 0.44; p = 0.14) groups. A statistically significantly higher rate of RE was found after TURP (risk ratio [RR] 13.31; 95% CI 8.37, 21.17; p < 0.00001), other electrosurgical procedures (RR 34.77; 95% CI 10.58, 127.82; p < 0.00001), and the entire laser group (RR 17.37; 95% CI 5.93, 50.81; p < 0.00001). No statistically significant increase in RE rate was described after most of the minimally invasive procedures (p > 0.05). The pooled analysis of MSHQ-EjD scores was possible only for prostatic urethral lift, showing no statistically significant difference between baseline and post-treatment MSHQ-EjD Function scores (WMD -0.80 pts; 95% CI -2.41, 0.81; p = 0.33), but postoperative MSHQ-EjD Bother scores were significantly higher (WMD 0.76 pts; 95% CI 0.22, 1.30; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Erectile function appears to be unaffected by most surgical procedures for BPO. RE is a very common adverse event of BPH surgery, although emerging minimally invasive surgical procedures could be associated with a lower risk.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery can have an impact on sexual function, mainly involving ejaculatory function.

Comparison of bipolar plasmakinetic resection of prostate versus photoselective vaporization of prostate by a three year retrospective observational study

Comprehensive evaluation of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) versus plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) in treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is inadequate. This single-centre, retrospective observational study was designed to compare their efficacy, complications and sexual function. A total of 215 patients under PVP or PKRP were included in the study, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to match the baseline characteristics of the two groups, and perioperative and three-year follow-up data were compared between them. Finally, 120 patients (60 for PVP and 60 for PKRP) were matched after PSM. Compared with the PKRP group, the intraoperative haemoglobin loss was lower (9.08 vs 13.75 g/L, P < 0.001) and the duration of catheterization and postoperative hospital stay were shorter (2.97 vs 4.10 day, P < 0.001; 3.95 vs 5.13 day, P < 0.001, respectively), but the operation time was longer (56.72 vs 49, 90 min, P < 0.001) in the PVP group. Urination measurements were improved for both groups after surgery, although no significant differences were found between them during follow-up. Sexual function after surgery was partly increased; however, frequent retrograde and discomfortable ejaculation occurred in both groups. In addition, dysuria incidence and retreatment were higher in the PVP group at 12 months. In conclusion, PVP is safe and effective in relieving BPH-related lower urinary tract symptoms with less perioperative blood loss and earlier recovery without inferior sexual function effects. However, the study is potentially affected by residual unmeasured confounding.

Mechanical and Ablative Minimally Invasive Techniques for Male LUTS due to Benign Prostatic Obstruction: A Systematic Review according to BPH-6 Evaluation

The treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic obstruction represents one of the major interesting aspects in urological clinical practice. Although transurethral resection of the prostate is still considered the surgical gold standard for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with prostate volume <80 mL, various minimally invasive surgical treatments (MITs) have been developed to overcome the limitations of the "conventional" surgery. To date, there are no validated tools to evaluate the surgical outcomes of MITs; however, in the past, BPH-6 has been used for this purpose. In this systematic review, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of MITs according to BPH-6 score system. We focused our attention on MITs based on mechanical devices (prostatic urethral lift and the temporary implantable nitinol device) and techniques for prostate ablation (image guided robotic waterjet ablation and convective water vapor energy ablation). Evidence shows that MITs are capable of leading to an improvement in LUTS without having an overwhelming impact on complications and are a valid alternative to other treatments in patients who wish to preserve their sexual function or in case of inapplicability of conventional surgery. However, comparative studies between these techniques are still missing.

Epidemiology and treatment modalities for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common conditions affecting men. BPH can lead to a number of symptoms for patients commonly referred to as lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Over the last decade, increased modifiable risk factors, such as metabolic disease and obesity, have resulted in an increased incidence of BPH. This increasing incidence has brought about a multitude of treatment modalities in the last two decades. With so many treatment modalities available, physicians are tasked with selecting the optimal therapy for their patients. Current therapies can first be divided into medical or surgical intervention. Medical therapy for BPH includes 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors and alpha-blockers, or a combination of both. Surgical interventions include a conventional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), as well as newer modalities such as bipolar TURP, holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), Greenlight and thulium laser, and prostatic urethral lift (PUL). Emerging therapies in this field must also be further investigated for safety and efficacy. This narrative review attempts to consolidate current and emerging treatment options for BPH and highlights the need for additional investigation on optimizing treatment selection.

Lasers versus bipolar technology in the transurethral treatment of benign prostatic enlargement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

PURPOSE

To systematically review studies comparing the overall efficacy and safety of lasers and bipolar technology for the transurethral treatment of benign prostatic enlargement (BPE).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was completed in February 2018. Studies with comparative data between different lasers and bipolar technologies (enucleation or resection) were included in this review. A meta-analysis was performed using STATA 14.0, and subgroup analyses were also performed regarding the type of laser (holmium, thulium, green light and diode).

RESULTS

27 studies with 31 published articles (4382 patients) were selected for the meta-analysis. Compared with bipolar technology, lasers demonstrated shorter catheterization duration (standardized mean difference (SMD): 1.44; 95% CI 1.07-1.81; p < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (SMD: 1.16; 95% CI 0.83-1.49; p < 0.001), and a smaller drop in hemoglobin (Hb) level (SMD: 0.86; 95% CI 0.47-1.26; p < 0.001). However, significant heterogeneity was detected in the studies and statistical significance was lost on sub-analyses. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between lasers and bipolar technology in the maximum flow rate (Qmax) and international prostate symptom score (IPSS) at a minimum of 3 months after treatment. Complications, including urethral stricture, urinary incontinence, urinary tract infection, re-catheterization and blood transfusion, did not significantly differ between lasers and bipolar technology.

CONCLUSION

Early efficacy and safety profiles were comparable between bipolar and laser treatments. Differences were observed in terms of smaller reduction in Hb, shorter catheterization duration and shorter hospital stay in favor of lasers. However, the smaller reduction in Hb, with lasers, did not translate into reduced transfusion requirements. Furthermore, there was significant heterogeneity in the studies and, in subgroup analyses, the differences were not statistically significant.

"Aquabeam® System" for benign prostatic hyperplasia and LUTS: birth of a new era. A systematic review of functional and sexual outcome and adverse events of the technique

PURPOSE

Aim of this systematic review is to evaluate functional outcomes (Qmax, QoL, IPSS, PVR), sexual outcome (erectile dysfunction and anejaculation rate), and adverse events evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

METHODS

The bibliographic search with the included terms (prostate, benign prostatic hyperplasia, benign prostatic enlargement, lower urinary tract symptoms, water jet dissection, aquablation, Aquabeam®) produced a literature of 32 articles altogether. After removing papers of not interest or articles which the outcomes could not be deduced, nine studies were examined for a total of 664 patients screened.

RESULTS

The functional outcomes, evaluated after water jet dissection, have shown improvement with respect to the baseline in all the selected articles. In the comparison papers with the TURP, the Aquablation has been statistically not inferior regarding functional outcomes. The sexual outcomes have highlighted a better ejaculation rate for water jet dissection than TURP. Regarding the adverse events, water jet dissection documented low rates of adverse events and, in comparison studies, were not statistically superior than TURP.

CONCLUSIONS

In our systematic review, the Aquabeam® System for the treatment of LUTS/BPH has proven to be a safe technique that provides functional outcomes comparable to TURP. About sexual outcomes, the most important data is certainly the low rate of retrograde ejaculation. However, other multicenter randomized trials with larger cohorts and longer follow-up are still needed.