Photoselective Vaporization with KTP 180-W Green Laser for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Symptoms Secondary to Benign Prostatic Enlargement: Effectiveness and Safety at Midterm Follow-Up

The feasibility and safety of photoselective vaporization for prostate using a 180-W XPS Greenlight laser in day-surgery pattern in China

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of photoselective vaporization for prostate (PVP) with a 180-W XPS Greenlight laser as day surgery in the Chinese population. We retrospectively collected 114 cases undergoing the day surgery PVP and 198 cases undergoing conventional inpatient surgery PVP from April 2017 to March 2020. All patients' data including baseline characteristics, peri-operative data, post-operative outcomes, and complications were recorded and evaluated. The day-surgery procedures were successful in 110 patients. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics in both groups. The catheterization time and hospitalization time were much shorter and economic cost was much lower in the day-surgery group than in the conventional inpatient surgery group. As for the post-operative complications, the incidence rate of the urinary retention is higher in the day-surgery group than in conventional inpatient surgery group. During the follow-up periods, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximal urinary flow rate (Qmax), and post-void residual urine (PVR) improved significantly in both groups, and no differences were observed between the two groups. Compared to the conventional inpatient surgery, the day-surgery PVP is feasible and safe, which can reduce the hospitalization time and economic cost.

Application of 180W XPS GreenLight laser vaporization of the prostate for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia

PURPOSE

To evaluate safety, efficacy and clinical outcomes after photovaporization of the prostate with the 180W-XPS Greenlight laser in patients with low urinary tracts symptom secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All 102 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms who underwent 180W XPS laser vaporization of the prostate from April 2017 to April 2018 were enrolled. The preoperative parameters, postoperative functional, uroflowmetry outcomes and complications were collected.

RESULTS

All patients were successfully treated with 180W XPS laser vaporization. Mean preoperative prostate volume was 81±28.7 ml and mean laser time was 28.2±12.5 minutes. No major complications intraoperatively or postoperatively were observed and no blood transfusions were required. Comparing to preoperative characteristics, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax) and post-void residual (PVR) parameters were improved significantly and sustained during the follow-up period. At 3, 6 and 12-month follow-ups, mean urinary peak flow increased from 6.2±2.1 ml per second to 19.8±4.6, 19.4±4.7 and 19.6±4.9 ml per second, respectively. Mean International Prostate Symptom Scores decreased over time, from 28.9±4.5 to 8.2±1.6, 6.2±1.22 and 5.88±1.15 at 3, 6, 12 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

180W XPS Greenlight laser vaporization is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to BPH.

The Surgical Experience Influences the Safety and Efficacy of Photovaporization of Prostate with 180-W XPS GreenLight Laser: Comparison Between Novices vs Expert Surgeons Learning Curves

PURPOSE

To assess the extent to which surgical experience can affect perioperative and functional outcomes after photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) with 180W XPX GreenLight laser in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 291 consecutive patients with symptomatic BPO (median follow-up 12 m) were collected and analyzed. Patients were treated at 2 different institutions by 2 expert (G1, n = 182) and 2 novice (G2, n = 109) transurethral prostate surgeons (February 2013 - March 2017) and underwent standard or anatomical PVP depending on surgeons' preferences. Patients' characteristics, perioperative and functional outcomes were compared using the chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. Patients' satisfaction was measured using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) score. Learning curves were analyzed based on changes in quantitative parameters: surgery time, lasing/operative time, and energy delivered (kJ).

RESULTS

Patients' baseline characteristics, perioperative data and PGI-I score were similar. Overall the complication rates showed better trends for G1. Serum prostate-specific antigen levels, maximum flow rate, and International Prostatic Symptoms Score improved in both groups, with perceived improvements greater in G2 (p < 0.006). Lasing time/operative time ratio showed greater evolution for G1 than G2 (0.50:IQR 0.38-0.60 vs 0.46:IQR 0.34-0.58, respectively)(p = 0.201). A major increase in energy delivery for G2 was achieved within the first 50 procedures, whereas more than 100 iterations were needed for G1 to reach LT/OT >60%.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons' background and expertise appear to affect outcomes over the learning curve, with roughly similar perioperative and functional results.

Photovaporization of the prostate with GreenLight™ laser 180 W XPS versus transurethral resection of the prostate with monopolar energy for the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement: a cost-utility analysis from a healthcare perspective

PURPOSE

To assess the cost-utility of the photovaporization of the prostate (PVP) with GreenLight™ laser 180 W XPS compared to transurethral resection of the prostate with monopolar energy (M-TURP) for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) from a healthcare perspective in Colombia.

METHODS

We designed a Markov model to compare four health states following treatment with either PVP or M-TURP to estimate expected costs and outcomes. We used the results of the only randomized clinical trial published to date comparing PVP versus M-TURP to estimate surgical outcomes, complications, re-operation and re-intervention rates. Time horizon was defined at 2 years with four cycles of 6 months each. Resource-use estimation involved a random selection of clinical records from a local institution and cost list from public healthcare system. Costs were obtained in Colombian pesos and converted to US dollars. Threshold was defined at three-times the Colombian gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) were used based on the utilities of the available literature. Uncertainty was analyzed with deterministic and probabilistic models using a Monte Carlo simulation.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent PVP gained 1.81 QALYs compared to 1.59 with M-TURP. Costs were US$6797.98 and US$7777.59 for M-TURP and PVP, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$4452.81 per QALY, favoring PVP as a cost-effective alternative in our context.

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia, with current prices, PVP is cost-effective when compared to M-TURP for LUTS due to BPE for a 2-year time horizon.