Retrospective Analysis of Short-Term Outcomes After Monopolar Versus Laser Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate: A Single Center Experience

A Comparison of the First 60 Enucleation Cases Using a Thulium Fiber Laser without a Mentor to a Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) and Open Prostatectomy, and the Learning Curve

Background and Objectives: In the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), laser enucleation of the prostate is recommended as an alternative to transurethral resection (TURP) and open prostatectomy (OP). The thulium fiber laser, with its superficial penetration depth, can offer a rapid learning process by causing less heat injury and capsule damage. This study compares the first 60 cases of an endourologist performing thulium fiber enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) without a mentor to the results of OP and TURP performed by experienced surgeons. It also identifies the case number at which the operation time for ThuFLEP starts to plateau. Materials and Methods: Between 1 November 2021 and 1 November 2023, the initial 60 ThuFLEP cases of an endourologist with no prior enucleation experience were compared with TURP and OP operations performed by experienced surgeons. Since the first 60 ThuFLEP cases involved 80-120 cc prostates, TURP and OP operations within this size range performed during the same period were included in the study. The groups were assessed for age, preoperative and postoperative prostate volume, PSA levels, the IPSS, the IPSS Quality of Life (QoL), and maximum urinary flow (Qmax). The 60 consecutive ThuFLEP cases were divided into three groups of 20 (Groups 1, 2, and 3) and compared for operation time, IPSS, and Qmax. Results: The operation time for TURP was shorter than for ThuFLEP and OP (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between ThuFLEP and OP in postoperative Qmax and IPSS, while TURP had lower values than the other two methods. For ThuFLEP, the operation time was longer in the first 20 cases but plateaued in groups 2 and 3 (p < 0.001). Postoperative Qmax and IPSS values showed no significant differences among the three ThuFLEP groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: For large prostates, ThuFLEP provides better postoperative results than TURP and offers shorter catheterization and hospital stay times than OP. Its short learning curve makes it a preferable method for treating BPH compared to other laser techniques.

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.

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.

Comparison of HoLEP, ThuLEP and ThuFLEP in the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), Thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP) and Thulium fibre laser enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP) by performing propensity score matched analysis (PSM).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the patients who underwent HoLEP (Group 1, n = 696), ThuLEP (Group 2, n = 146) and ThuFLEP (Group 3, n = 193) surgery because of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). A 1:1:1 HoLEP: ThuLEP: ThuFLEP group matching was performed using PSM analysis. Perioperative, postoperative functional outcomes and complications were analysed and compared.

RESULTS

We observed significant improvement in functional parameters regarding IPSS, Qmax, PVR and quality of life in all groups compared to baseline values at the 1st, 6th and 12th postoperative months. There was no significant difference between different laser types in terms of urge (UUI) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) at 1st postoperative month. In all three groups, no patient had postoperative SUI or UUI at 6th and 12th postoperative months. In addition, no significant difference was observed between laser types in terms of postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

HoLEP, ThuLEP and ThuFLEP are safe and effective LEP methods with improvement in functional parameters and low complication rates. Similar results in terms of functional outcomes and complications clearly show that these surgeries are alternatives to each other for the patients with BPO. Experts' opinions, practices and enucleation techniques should also be taken into consideration when choosing a laser for BPO surgery.

Thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review of the current outcomes

INTRODUCTION

One recent addition to different lasers used for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is the thulium fiber laser (TFL). The purpose of this systematic review is to present the feasibility, safety and efficacy of TFL Enucleation of the Prostate (ThuFLEP).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed®, Scopus® and Cochrane® primary databases were systematically screened. The search strategy used the PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) criteria. Patients should be adults with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) undergoing ThuFLEP. While comparative studies reporting comparison of ThuFLEP to other BPO treatments were included, cohort studies with no comparison group were also accepted. Outcomes including enucleation time and complication rates were reported.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Twelve studies met all the predefined criteria and were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Mean operative time and enucleation time ranged from 46.6±10.2 to 104.5±33.6 and from 38.8±17.9 to 66.0±24.9 minutes, respectively. Most of the complications were Grade I or Grade II ones. Although TFL was found to present some advantages over older BPO treatments, its outcomes were comparable with other endoscopic enucleation approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

ThuFLEP seems to be a feasible, safe and efficient approach for BPO symptoms management. Limited evidence showed that although ThuFLEP was associated with a reduced total operative time, it was also associated with worse IPSS improvement at 1-year follow-up, when compared with MOSESTM Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP). These findings confirm the well-established opinion that the enucleation technique itself is more important than the technology which is used.

Monopolar Transurethral Enucleoresection of Prostate: Feasibility of Modified Nesbit's Enucleoresection with Apical Release

Background: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has been the standard surgical treatment for Benign Hyperplasia of the Prostate (BPH) for decades. Our objective was to evaluate the outcome of our new technique: Monopolar Transurethral Enucleoresection of the Prostate (TUERP) with apical release (bring it all to centre). Methods: A prospective study of all cases undergoing TUERP at a tertiary centre from January 2020 to October 2022 was performed. Patient demographics, intraoperative variables and postoperative results along with follow-up data were collected. Data of all the cases who had completed a one-year follow-up post-surgery were included and analysed. Results: A total of 240 patients with complete data including a one-year follow-up were included. Mean prostatic volume was 55.3 ± 11.6 gm, and 28 (11.67%) cases were >100 gm. The mean operative time was 31.7 ± 7.6, and mean haemoglobin drop at 24 h was 0.73 ± 1.21 gm/dL. The overall complication rate was 16.67%, with only two (0.83%) Clavien-Dindo III complications (haematuria and clots needing evacuation) and the other complications being Clavien-Dindo I/II complications. Sustained improvement at 1 year of follow-up was noted: Qmax: 25.2 ± 5.6 mL/s, IPSS: 4.7 ± 2.5 and PVR: 22.5 ± 9.6 mL. Conclusions: Monopolar TUERP with a modified Nesbit's enucleoresection with apical release can be considered a promising technique, which needs further studies to be validated with appropriate comparisons.

Lasers for benign prostatic hyperplasia (hybrid, blue diode, TFL, Moses). Which one to choose?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To present the evidence of latest developments of lasers for the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). We focused on recent advancements in Ho:YAG laser such as Moses technology, the Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL), the blue diode laser, and hybrid laser.

RECENT FINDINGS

Laser enucleation of prostate techniques using either Ho:YAG laser with the Moses technology and Moses 2.0, or TFL seem efficient and safe compared with the standard enucleation using Ho:YAG laser. Only in vitro studies evaluated the blue diode laser and hybrid laser (combination of a continuous wave TFL and blue diode laser). Blue diode laser showed intermediate incision depth and minimal coagulation depth compared with Ho:YAG laser and Super Pulse TFL. Hybrid laser showed deep incision depth and small coagulation area compared with Ho:YAG laser and continuous wave TFL.

SUMMARY

Surgical treatment of BPH using Moses technology, Moses 2.0, and TFL shows encouraging results comparable to the standard enucleation using Ho:YAG laser. Only in vitro data are currently available for blue diode laser and hybrid laser. Future well-designed studies comparing these technologies and evaluating them on specific risk groups of patients as well as the long-term durability of outcomes are needed.

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.

Surgical treatment options for benign prostatic obstruction: beyond prostate volume

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Many surgical treatment options are available for patients who present with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). This article reviews the current treatment options available and distinguishes them based on five clinical considerations: antithrombotic therapy, sexual function preservation, ambulatory procedures, anesthesia-related risks and duration of catheterization.

RECENT FINDINGS

A comprehensive review of the literature was performed on 10 BPO procedures. Laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP), bipolar plasma transurethral vaporization of the prostate and photoselective vaporization (PVP) of the prostate reduces the risk of bleeding, which is recommended for anticoagulated men. Ejaculatory function is more likely to be preserved following transurethral incision of the prostate, Rezūm, Aquablation, UroLift and iTind. Same-day discharge is possible for LEP, PVP and prostatic arterial embolization (PAE). For patients with high anesthesia-related risks, procedures compatible with local anesthesia (UroLift, Rezūm, iTind and PAE) should be favored. Catheterization duration is shorter with UroLift, PVP and LEP.

SUMMARY

BPO treatment options are growing rapidly. The optimal procedure for a given patient is based on factors such as associated risks, recovery and expected outcomes. Besides prostate volume, the clinical considerations in the present article can help elucidate the best surgical BPO treatment option for each patient based on their values, preferences, and risk tolerance.

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.

Comparison of enucleation between thulium laser and holmium laser for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of Thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP) and Holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP). We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases within a period from the date of database establishment to October 2020. RevMan 5.4. was used for calculation and statistical analyses. 8 studies of 2125 patients were included. ThuLEP provided less hemoglobin decrease (MD: -0.37, 95%CI -0.61 to -0.14, P = 0.002) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD: -0.41, 95%CI -0.72 to -0.10, P = 0.01). During the postoperative follow-ups, statistically significant differences only were found in IPSS (MD: -0.96; 95%CI -1.27 to -0.65; P < 0.00001) at the 3rd month. In conclusion, our study demonstrates that ThuLEP, compared with HoLEP, has better security, faster improvement of symptoms. However, our conclusions still require a larger sample size, multi-center, and longer follow-up randomized controlled trials to verify.

Nomenclature in thulium laser treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: it's time to pull the rabbit out of the hat

We performed a narrative review with the focus on laser settings and surgical procedure with thulium laser. Our primary goal was to define the most valid settings of each surgical procedure to overcome the inconsistency about nomenclature of thulium surgery and to ensure comparability of future publications. A literature search of articles on thulium laser treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) was conducted between 2009 and 2019. We proposed a new classification standard for laser settings and associated surgical procedure. Each article was analyzed and categorized as concordant or discordant referring to the new classification. In total, 74 papers were included in this narrative review. Overall, 43% and 42% of included studies reported discordant laser parameters and surgical description, respectively. Most of the studies on vaporization were categorized as discordant because they reported a medium/low laser setting instead of high power. Conversely, 93.3% of studies on enucleation were deemed as discordant for laser setting because they reported high power parameters instead of medium-low power setting. Most of the studies on laser enucleation and vapo/enucleation were considered discordant for surgical procedure since authors did not mention the use of mechanical vs. laser method for enucleation. The current literature lacks a uniform definition and standardization of the terminology of thulium laser settings and surgical techniques to guarantee comparability between different approaches. We found a huge heterogeneity in 10 years of surgery with thulium laser. We proposed a new classification of laser setting and procedural description for categorization of thulium laser surgery for BPH.

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate in management of benign prostatic hyperplasia: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of holmium enucleation of the prostate and bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate.

METHODS

In our randomized controlled trial, 120 patients were allocated into two equal groups representing holmium enucleation of the prostate and bipolar enucleation of the prostate. Operative parameters were recorded according to operative, enucleation and resection time in addition to the intraoperative complications. Patients were followed up at 1, 3 and 12 months postoperative to assess the prostate size, post-voiding residual urine, International Prostate Symptom Score, peak urine flow rate and quality of life, and compared with the preoperative parameters. Cost analysis was evaluated for both procedures.

RESULTS

We evaluated 107 patients who finished our follow up and their data were analyzed. The prostate size was 135.2 ± 34.8 mL and 125 ± 26.9 mL for holmium enucleation of the prostate and bipolar enucleation of the prostate, respectively. Holmium enucleation of the prostate was associated with a shorter operative time of 83.43 ± 6.92 min compared with 94.7 ± 12.2 min in bipolar enucleation of the prostate groups. Holmium enucleation of the prostate was associated with an earlier catheter removal time and shorter hospital stay compared with bipolar enucleation of the prostate. Postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score, quality of life, post-voiding residual urine, peak urine flow rate, prostate-specific antigen and prostate volume reduction were comparable between both groups, and they both showed statistically significant improvement compared with their preoperative parameters. In the cost analysis, holmium enucleation of the prostate was more cost-effective than bipolar enucleation of the prostate.

CONCLUSION

Both holmium enucleation of the prostate and bipolar enucleation of the prostate are safe and effective in the surgical management of large prostatic adenomas. Holmium enucleation of the prostate has a shorter operative time and hospital stay with earlier catheter removal time, and is more cost-effective than bipolar enucleation of the prostate.

Ex vivo study of Ho:YAG and thulium fiber lasers for soft tissue surgery: which laser for which case?

The goal of this study was to assess the ablation, coagulation, and carbonization characteristics of the holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) laser and thulium fiber lasers (TFL). The Ho:YAG laser (100 W av.power), the quasi-continuous (QCW) TFL (120 W av.power), and the SuperPulsed (SP) TFL (50 W av.power) were compared on a non-frozen porcine kidney. To control the cutting speed (2 or 5 mm/s), an XY translation stage was used. The Ho:YAG was tested using E = 1.5 J and P_av = 40 W or P_av = 70 W settings. The TFL was tested using E = 1.5 J and P_av = 30 W or P_av = 60 W settings. After ex vivo incision, histological analysis was performed in order to estimate thermal damage. At 40 W, the Ho:YAG displayed a shallower cutting at 2 and 5 mm/s (1.1 ± 0.2 mm and 0.5 ± 0.2 mm, respectively) with virtually zero coagulation. While at 70 W, the minimal coagulation depth measured 0.1 ± 0.1 mm. The incisions demonstrated zero carbonization. Both the QCW and SP TFL did show effective cutting at all speeds (2.1 ± 0.2 mm and 1.3 ± 0.2 mm, respectively, at 30 W) with prominent coagulation (0.6 ± 0.1 mm and 0.4 ± 0.1 mm, respectively, at 70 W) and carbonization. Our study introduced the TFL as a novel efficient alternative for soft tissue surgery to the Ho:YAG laser. The SP TFL offers a Ho:YAG-like incision, while QCW TFL allows for fast, deep, and precise cutting with increased carbonization.

The impact of the laser fiber-tissue distance on histological parameters in a porcine kidney model

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of the fiber-tissue distance on histological parameters in a porcine kidney model.

METHODS

Four lasers were tested at 60 W using a 600-µm bare-ended fiber: a continuous wave (cw) thulium fiber laser (TFL), a super pulsed (SP) TFL, a Ho:YAG laser, and a blue diode laser (BDL). All tissue samples were mounted on a motorized XY-translation stage. The fiber-tissue distance was changed within a range from 0to 6 mm. Ten incisions were made with each laser at each distance. Afterwards, the tissue samples were sliced with a microtome for lactate dehydrogenase staining to determine zones of thermal damage.

RESULTS

In contact mode, the largest incision depth was found for the cw TFL (1.7 ± 0.1 mm) compared to the SP TFL (1.0 ± 0.1 mm), BDL (0.9 ± 0.1 mm) and HoYAG laser (1.1 ± 0.1 mm), respectively. With regard to the coagulative properties, the SP TFL and the Ho:YAG laser showed comparable coagulation depths with 0.7 ± 0.1 and 0.6 ± 0.1 mm, respectively. At 2 mm fiber-tissue distance, the Ho:YAG laser was the only laser that vaporized tissue (incision depth: 0.2 ± 0.1 mm). The BDL was the only laser that caused coagulation at a distance of 3-5 mm.

CONCLUSION

Our results support the clinical observation that cw TFL must be defocused for best coagulation, while the coagulation depth of the SP TFL remains nearly constant within the range of 0-3 mm. Increasing the distance of the laser fiber to the tissue up to 5 mm did not cause significant differences with regard to coagulation depth using the BDL.

En bloc and two-lobe techniques for laser endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: retrospective comparative analysis of peri- and postoperative outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Various techniques can be used for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP): removal of all nodes as a single unit (en bloc) or a step-by-step removal of adenomatous nodes (two- and three-lobe techniques). The objective of this study was to perform a comparative analysis of en bloc and two-lobe techniques for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP).

METHODS

Retrospective assessment included patients with bladder outlet obstruction (IPSS > 20, Qmax < 10) secondary to BPH treated from January 2013 to December 2018. All the patients were assessed prior to surgery, as well as at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The data of 1115 patients who underwent HoLEP or ThuFLEP were analyzed. Two techniques were used: en bloc (406 patients) and two-lobe (709 patients). Mean prostate volumes were comparable between groups. Mean surgery times (68.8 ± 30.6 min vs 67.4 ± 30.1 min; p = 0.604) and enucleation rates (1.9 ± 0.74 g/min vs 1.9 ± 0.69 g/min; p = 0.217) were also comparable. Morcellation rate was lower in en bloc patients with prostate > 150 cc (2.8 ± 1.1 g/min vs 3.7 ± 2.3 g/min; p < 0.001). At 6 months, no differences in functional outcomes (IPSS, PVR, Qmax and QoL) were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes and complication rates of en bloc and two-lobe EEP techniques were comparable. En bloc technique was found to have less favorable outcomes in morcellation rate for prostates > 150 cc. The choice of the technique should depend on surgeon's preferences.

Monopolar enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for small- and medium-sized (< 80 cc) benign prostate hyperplasia: a prospective analysis

AIM

To assess efficacy and safety of monopolar enucleation of the prostate (MEP) and to compare it with the current treatment standard for medium-sized prostates, < 80 cc, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

METHODS

A prospective analysis patients undergoing a surgical procedure for their diagnosis of BPH (benign prostatic hyperplasia) (IPSS > 20, Q_max < 10; prostate volume < 80 cc) was performed. IPSS, Q_max were assessed preoperatively, at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The complications were classified according to the modified Clavien-Dindo grading system.

RESULTS

A total of 134 patients were included in the study: 70 underwent MEP and 64 - TURP for BPH (mean prostate volumes were comparable with p = 0.163). The mean surgery time was 44 min in the TURP group and 48.2 min in the MEP group, (p = 0.026). Catheterization time for MEP was 1.7 and 3.2 days for TURP (p < 0.001). Hospital stay for MEP was 3.2 days vs. 4.8 days for TURP (p < 0.001). Both techniques shown comparable efficiency in benign prostatic obstruction relief with IPSS drop in MEP from 23.1 to 5.9 and in TURP group from 22.8 to 7.3, whereas Q_max increased from 8.2 to 20.5 after MEP and from 8.3 and 19.9 after TURP. Urinary incontinence rate after catheter removal in TURP group was 9.0% and 7.8% in MEP group, at 1 year follow-up, it was 1.4% and 3.1% in MEP and TURP, respectively (p = 0.466).

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience demonstrated that MEP is an effective and safe BPH treatment option combining the efficacy of endoscopic enucleation techniques and accessibility of conventional TURP.

Enucleation of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia thulium laser versus holmium laser: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of thulium laser vapoenucleation/enucleation of the prostate (ThuEP) versus holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify eligible studies published before July 2018. Meta-analysis of extracted data was performed with RevMan version 5.3. We chose the fixed- or random-effect model to fit the pooled heterogeneity. Five eligible studies including two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three non-RCTs involving 1010 patients were enrolled in our meta-analysis. ThuEP provided less enucleation time when compared with HoLEP (WMD = - 7.73, 95% CI - 14.39-1.07, P = 0.02). During the 1st, 6th, and 12th months of postoperative follow-ups, statistically significant differences were found in Qmax (WMD = 2.05, 95% CI 0.52~3.58) and PVR (WMD = - 6.50, 95% CI - 7.35~- 5.66, P < 0.001) in the 1st month after the operation, also in IPSS (IPSS: WMD = - 1.29, 95% CI - 2.39~- 0.19, P = 0.02) in the 12th month after the operation. As regards other perioperative, postoperative parameters, and complication rates, we found no significant difference. Both ThuEP and HoLEP provided satisfactory micturition improvement with low morbidity after the 1st and 6th months of the operation. However, ThuEP showed higher enucleation efficacy and less intraoperative blood loss and may get a better outcome as compared to the HoLEP group in the early postoperative period with regard to Qmax/PVR and IPSS after the 1st and 12th months of the operation respectively.

Impact of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate with thulium fiber laser on the erectile function

Background

The impact of number of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate techniques (holmium laser enucleation - HoLEP for example) on erectile function have already been investigated. However, the thulium-fiber laser, in this setting remains unstudied. In this study, we compared sexual function outcomes in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) treated with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or thulium-fiber laser enucleation (ThuFLEP).

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent transurethral resection and endoscopic enucleation of the prostate for BPH; inclusion criteria was the presence of infravesical obstruction (IPSS > 20, Qmax < 10 mL/s). Erectile function (EF) was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) both prior to endoscopic examination, and six months after.

Results

A total of 469 patients with BPH were included in the study; of these, 211 underwent to ThuFLEP, and 258 TURP. Preoperative IIEF-5 in TURP and ThuFLEP groups were 11.7 (±4.5) and 11.1 (±5.0), respectively (p = 0.17). At six month the IIEF-5 score was unchanged (p = 0.26 and p = 0.08) and comparable in both groups (p = 0.49). However, mean IIEF-5 score shown significant increase of 0.72 in ThuFLEP group, comparing to decrease of 0.24 in TURP patients (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Both TURP and ThuFLEP are effective modalities in the management of infravesical obstruction due to BPH. At six months follow-up after surgery, both techniques lead to comparable IIEF-5 score. However, our results demonstrated that the ThuFLEP is more likely to preserve the erectile function leading to increase of IIEF-5 at six months in contrast to TURP which lead to slight drop in IIEF-5 score.

A Randomized Trial Comparing The Learning Curve of 3 Endoscopic Enucleation Techniques (HoLEP, ThuFLEP, and MEP) for BPH Using Mentoring Approach-Initial Results

OBJECTIVE

To assess the differences in the learning curve associated with different techniques of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety patients were randomly assigned into 3 groups (30 patients in each): HoLEP, ThuFLEP or MEP. Inclusion criteria for the study included prostate volume <80 cc, IPSS > 20, or Qmax < 10. The EEPs were performed by 3 surgeons experienced in transurethral resection of the prostate. Assignment of surgeons to surgical technique was also randomized. None of the surgeons had prior experience in EEP.

RESULTS

ThuFLEP was slightly superior (with no significant difference [P > .05]) to HoLEP and MEP in terms of overall enucleation rate-1.0 g/min vs 0.8 g/min and 0.7 g/min, respectively. We observed similar enucleation rates at the initial stages of training (first 20 surgeries) with insignificant increase in ThuFLEP efficiency. At next 10 surgeries ThuFLEP and HoLEP efficiency were higher than of MEP (P < .001) without significant difference between techniques of laser EEP (P = .07).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate can be adopted safely and effectively within 30 surgeries if the technique is learned with a mentoring approach. EEP is shown to be safe and effective even in the initial stages of learning. Laser EEP (HoLEP, ThuFLEP) appears to lend itself to quicker adaptation compared MEP.