Impact on Sexual Function of Endoscopic Enucleation vs Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Evaluating the Impact of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Surgical Treatments on Sexual Health

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), a prevalent condition in older men, is often managed through various surgical interventions. This narrative review aims to explore the impact of these surgical treatments on sexual function, a critical aspect of patient quality of life often overlooked in BPH management. The methodology encompassed a thorough review of contemporary surgical techniques for BPH, including prostate resection, enucleation, vaporization, and minimally invasive therapies such as UroLift, Rezum, and Aquablation. Additionally, the focus was on patient-centered outcomes, with a special emphasis on sexual health following surgery. Findings reveal that, while surgical interventions effectively alleviate BPH symptoms, they often have significant repercussions in sexual function, including erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction. However, emerging techniques demonstrate potential in preserving sexual function, underscoring the need for patient-centric treatment approaches. The study highlights the complex interplay between BPH surgery and sexual health, with minimally invasive treatments showing promise in balancing symptom relief and sexual function preservation. In conclusion, the study advocates for an integrated, interdisciplinary approach to BPH treatment, emphasizing the importance of considering sexual health in therapeutic decision-making. This narrative review suggests a paradigm shift towards minimally invasive techniques could optimize patient outcomes, marrying symptom relief with quality-of-life considerations. The need for further research in this domain is evident, particularly in understanding long-term sexual health outcomes following different surgical interventions for BPH.

Features of patients referring to the outpatient office due to benign prostatic hyperplasia: analysis of a national prospective cohort of 5815 cases

BACKGROUND

Evidence on clinical presentation of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is scarce, and studies involving outpatients are lacking. We aimed to provide an insight into the contemporary Italian scenario of BPH-affected outpatients using symptom scores (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS], BPH Impact Index [BII]), and to compare characteristics of patients with known BPH and those first-diagnosed at the visit.

METHODS

"IMPROVING THE PATH" project working group designed a questionary prospectively administered to BPH-affected outpatients by urologists. A cross-sectional study was performed. Data were adjusted for patient age as a potential confounding factor.

RESULTS

Of 5815 patients enrolled, BPH was already diagnosed in 4144 (71.3%), and not in 1671 (28.7%). Patients with known BPH, compared to newly diagnosed, were older (median 68 versus [vs] 55), had more frequent smoking (smoker 27.2 vs 22.6%, and ex-smoker 16.4 vs 12.5%) and drinking habits (55.4 vs 45.1%), were more frequently affected by hypertension (60.0 vs 42.4%), obesity (15.3 vs 9.6%), diabetes (17.9 vs 12.5%), and cardiovascular diseases (14.2 vs 9.5%), p < 0.001. At IPSS, moderate and severe symptoms correlated with already known BPH (56.1 vs 47.3% and 24.8 vs 7.8%), whereas newly diagnosed patients showed milder symptoms (44.9 vs 19.1%), all p < 0.001. At BII, concern for one's health and time lost due to urinary problems were higher in patients with known BPH (p < 0.001). For these patients, the urologist changes at least one of the ongoing medications in 63.5%. For patients newly diagnosed, supplements/phytotherapeutics, alpha-blockers, and 5-alfa reductase inhibitors were prescribed in 54.6%, 21.6%, and 7.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite medical treatment, natural history of BPH leads to a progressive deterioration of symptoms. This may reflect the difference between newly diagnosed patients and those with known BPH in lifestyle and associated comorbidities. A healthy lifestyle and treatments including local anti-inflammatory agents may delay worsening of symptoms and improve quality of life.

Summary Paper on the 2023 European Association of Urology Guidelines on the Management of Non-neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms

CONTEXT

Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are common, often bothersome, and have multifactorial aetiology.

OBJECTIVE

To present a summary of the 2023 version of the European Association of Urology guidelines on the management of male LUTS.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A structured literature search from 1966 to 2021 selected the articles with the highest certainty evidence. The Delphi technique consensus approach was used to develop the recommendations.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The assessment of men with LUTS should be practical. A careful medical history and physical examination are essential. Validated symptom scores, urine test, uroflowmetry, and postvoid urine residual, as well as frequency-volume charts for patients with nocturia or predominately storage symptoms should be used. Prostate-specific antigen should be ordered if a diagnosis of prostate cancer changes the treatment plan. Urodynamics should be performed for selected patients. Men with mild symptoms are candidates for watchful waiting. Behavioural modification should be offered to men with LUTS prior to, or concurrent with, treatment. The choice of medical treatment depends on the assessment findings, predominant type of symptoms, ability of the treatment to change the findings, and the expectations to be met in terms of the speed of onset, efficacy, side effects, and disease progression. Surgery is reserved for men with absolute indications, and for patients who fail or prefer not to receive medical therapy. Surgical management has been divided into five sections: resection, enucleation, vaporisation, and alternative ablative and nonablative techniques. The choice of surgical technique depends on patient's characteristics, expectations, and preferences; surgeon's expertise; and availability of modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

The guidelines provide an evidence-based approach for the management of male LUTS.

PATIENT SUMMARY

A clinical assessment should identify the cause(s) of symptoms and define the clinical profile and patient's expectations. The treatment should aim to ameliorate symptoms and reduce the risk of complications.

Efficacy and Safety of 1470 nm Diode Laser Enucleation of the Prostate in Elderly Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patients

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of 1470 nm diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) and plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) in elderly benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Methods: A total of 123 elderly patients with BPH were randomized to undergo either 1470 nm DiLEP or PKRP by means of a random number table from September 2020 to April 2022. The perioperative and postoperative data were studied during a 3- and 6-month follow-up. Results: The patients treated with 1470 nm DiLEP had significantly decreased operation time (74.6 ± 17.0 vs 98.8 ± 18.9 minutes, p < 0.001), hemoglobin loss (1.06 ± 0.49 vs 1.59 ± 0.60 g/dL, p < 0.001), bladder irrigation time (22.1 ± 8.1 vs 33.9 ± 10.0 hours, p < 0.001), catheter duration (3.2 ± 1.3 vs 5.8 ± 1.0 days, p < 0.001), and hospital stay (7.6 ± 1.4 vs 9.6 ± 1.3 days, p < 0.001) compared with the PKRP group. Besides, International Index of Erectile Function-5 score of 1470 nm DiLEP group at postoperative 3- and 6-month follow-up was significantly higher than PKRP group. No differences achieving statistical significance were identified in total prostate-specific antigen, maximum urinary flow rate, International Prostate Symptom Score, quality-of-life score, and the postvoid residual urine volume, transient incontinence, urethral stricture, bladder neck contracture, and retrograde ejaculation at 3- and 6-month follow-up. Conclusions: 1470 nm DiLEP is safer than PKRP, with a smaller effect on sexual function, and it is comparable with the efficacy of PKRP, thus making it more suitable for elderly BPH patients. Clinical Trial Registration number: S2021-463-01.

Clinical efficacy and complications of transurethral resection of the prostate versus plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common disease in elderly males, and many kinds of minimally invasive procedures can be used for the treatment of BPH. However, various procedures have caused some controversies regarding clinical outcomes, so more studies are needed to validate these controversial topics.

AIMS

This study aimed to explore differences of clinical efficacy, surgical features, and complications between transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) for BPH.

METHODS

A total of eligible 850 cases of BPH underwent TURP (the TURP group, 320 cases) or PKEP (the PKEP group, 530 cases) in the urology department of our hospital from March 2015 to 2018 were involved in this study. Then, the baseline data, surgical characteristics, IPSS, QoL, PVR, Q_max, IIEF-5, and documented complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The operative time, intraoperative irrigation volume, postoperative hemoglobin, decrease in hemoglobin, postoperative irrigation time and volume, catheterization time, and hospital stay of the PKEP group were significantly less than those of the TURP group (all P < 0.05). At 3 months, 1, 2, and 3 years after operation, no significant differences were observed in IPSS, QoL, PVR, but the results of Q_max and IIEF-5 in the PKEP group were significantly higher than those parameters in the TURP group (all P < 0.05). The incidences of massive blood loss, postoperative secondary bleeding, blood transfusion, capsular perforation, urinary tract irritation, bladder spasm, clot retention, urinary tract infection, transient incontinence, erectile dysfunction, and the incidences of II, III grade of Clavien-Dindo classification in the PKEP group were significantly lower than those of the TURP group (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The clinical efficacy of PKEP is compared favorably with TURP during midterm follow-up. Given the merits such as less blood loss and hospital stay, lower complications, PKEP should be given a priority for BPH.

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.

Assessment of Sexual Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Thulium Laser Prostate Surgery for Management of Benign Prostate Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Thulium laser (Tm:YAG) prostate surgery is a safe and effective procedure with low morbidity and comparable clinical outcomes to those of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). However, the sexual function outcomes (erectile and ejaculatory function) have been scarcely studied.

Aim

We aimed to assess the impact of Tm:YAG prostate surgery on sexual outcomes (erectile and ejaculatory function) and compare them with those patients undergoing TURP.

Material and Methods

We searched digital databases like PUBMED, SCOPUS, CENTRAL and EMBASE using relevant keywords to identify comparative studies on TURP and non-comparative studies on Tm:YAG prostate surgery that assessed sexual outcomes. We performed qualitative and quantitative analyses with the extracted data. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare postoperative International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) scores and incidences of retrograde ejaculation (RE) in patients undergoing either Tm:YAG or TURP. The pre-operative and post-operative IIEF-5 scores were pooled to estimate overall scores.

Results

We included 5 comparative and 8 non-comparative studies in this review. We found the postoperative IIEF-5 score improvements to be significantly higher in the Tm:YAG prostate surgery group than in the TURP group with a significant mean difference (MD) of 0.45 (95% CI, 0.18 to 0.72; P = .001). We found no significant associations between the procedures. The pooled OR for the association of RE was estimated at 0.90 (95% CI, 0.50 to 1.60; P = .71; I² = 0%).

Conclusion

Tm:YAG prostate surgery improves erectile function more than TURP, according to our findings. Tm:YAG prostate aided surgery also outperforms TURP in terms of preserving sexual function following surgery.However, We found similar or no difference in incidence of RE between Tm:YAG prostate surgery and TURP.

Bibo L, Hao L, Pang K, et al. Assessment of Sexual Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Thulium Laser Prostate Surgery for Management of Benign Prostate Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Sex Med 2022;10:100483.

Electrosurgery or laser for benign prostatic enlargement: trumpcard or pitfalls

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize and comment on publications of the last 2 years in the field of endoscopic surgery for benign prostatic enlargement, focusing on similarities and differences of laser and electrosurgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Because of good hemostasis and safety, invasive endoscopic surgery has evolved to a choice of treatment for vulnerable patients with ongoing antithrombotic medication and in same-day surgery. Recent publications show a good perioperative course and no deterioration in the postoperative outcome. Furthermore, alterations to the original surgical techniques of resection, enucleation, and vaporization have increased the preservation rate for antegrade ejaculation, advancing them to an appealing choice of treatment for sexually active men. Favorable outcomes can be achieved in both laser and electrosurgery. Only the choice of the surgical technique determines the outcome.

SUMMARY

Various invasive endoscopic surgical techniques are available, offering different advantages and disadvantages for the patient. All of them can be performed with laser and electrosurgery. Therefore, focusing on the proper choice of surgical technique instead of the energy source will guarantee the patient to benefit most.

Plasma Kinetic Enucleation Vs Holmium Laser Enucleation for Treating Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial with a 3-Year Follow-Up

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of plasma kinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods: A total of 160 patients with indications for the surgical treatment of BPH were randomly assigned to receive either PKEP or HoLEP prospectively. Baseline characteristics, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes of the patients were recorded. One hundred twenty-six (78.75%) patients (PKEP 64 vs HoLEP 62) completed the 3-year follow-up assessment. Results: Patients in both groups had similar baseline characteristics. Compared with PKEP, HoLEP was associated with shorter operative time as well as take-out time, lower perioperative hemoglobin decrease, and shorter bladder irrigation time, catheterization time, and hospital stay time. PKEP was superior to HoLEP in terms of the noise of the machine and hospitalization expenses. There were no significant differences in enucleating time, resected weight, and serum sodium levels. Both groups achieved satisfactory results and maintained improvement from baseline in terms of maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), International Prostatic Symptomatic Score, quality of life, and postvoid residual at 3-year follow-up, with no significant differences between the two procedures. Except for re-catheterization rate, postoperative data such as transrectal ultrasound volume, International Index of Erectile Function-5, and follow-up scores of the flexible cystourethroscopy results, as well as the acute and mid-to long-term complications after surgery, were statistically similar. Conclusion: The 3-year follow-up data of this randomized trial confirmed that both PKEP and HoLEP were effective and safe surgical procedures for the transurethral management of BPH. HoLEP presented certain advantages compared to PKEP, such as reduced operative duration, decreased risk of blood loss, and less bladder irrigation, hospital stay time, and re-catheterization rate, whereas PKEP had lower noise and no additional laser cost. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-TRC-13004468).

Preservation of antegrade ejaculation after surgical relief of benign prostatic obstruction is a valid endpoint

PURPOSE

To review the current data on retrograde ejaculation (RE) and ejaculatory dysfunction (EjD) after endoscopic and minimally invasive surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) and, their perceived impact in the quality of life (QoL) and sexual life of patients and their partners.

METHODS

Narrative review of systematic reviews (SR) assessing comparative rates of RE, EjD or erectile dysfunction (EF) was carried out. Relevant articles on the prevalence of RE, EjD or EF and on their impact in the QoL or sexual life of patients and partners were manually selected based on relevance.

RESULTS

Twelve SRs reporting on comparisons of different endoscopic/minimally invasive treatments of BPO were found. Data on outcomes varied widely. Overall, after conventional TURP or laser techniques 42-75% of patients present RE. Prostatic incision and ablative procedures present lowest rates of de novo RE or EjD whereas laser adenomectomy and ejaculation preservation procedures preserve antegrade ejaculation in 46-68% of patients. EjDs is associated to LUTS and present in 10% of sexualy active men before intervention. It modulates the QoL and sexual life of the couple. In spite of the scarce literature assessing patient's and partner's perception of postoperative EjD, it strongly suggests that both parties value the maintenance of the ejaculatory function.

CONCLUSION

Ejaculation-preserving techniques and minimally invasive techniques successfully prevent BPO treatment-induced RE or EjD in 70-100% of the cases. While this is appealing to patients and spouses, technique selection and treatment durability are issues to be discussed with the couple.

Current Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is characterized by the occurrence of.disorders of urine storage and bladder emptying. Most men over the age of 60 years are affected to some degree.

METHODS

A selective literature search with additional scrutiny of guidelines and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

The management of patients with BPH is complex. Emptying and retention disorders can be treated by various pharmacological and surgical means. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has long been considered the gold standard for operative treatment. Transurethral enucleation procedures show a better risk profile in some uses, however, and have, above all, largely displaced suprapubic prostatectomy. Numerous innovative treatment options have been developed in recent years, but their long-term effects remain to be determined. These treatment techniques can nevertheless be used in individual cases after thorough discussion with the patient.

CONCLUSION

The care of patients with BPH should be interdisciplinary. The efficacy and safety of many new developments in the area of pharmacological and minimally invasive treatment remain to be demonstrated in randomized trials.

Lasers in Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate-Do We Really Need Them

The acronym EEP, coding for transurethral Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate, was introduced in 2016 by the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines panel on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Since then, a laser-based treatment, Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP), and the current-based treatment of bipolar enucleation of the prostate (BipoLEP) are equally appreciated as valuable options for the management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). This was mainly inspired by the results of two meta-analyses on randomized controlled trials, comparing open prostatectomy with either Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) or bipolar enucleation of the prostate (BipoLEP). Prior to that, HoLEP was embraced as the only valid option for transurethral enucleation, although evidence for equivalence existed as early as 2006, but was not recognized due to a plethora of acronyms for bipolar energy-based treatments and practiced HoLEP-centrism. On the other hand, the academic discourse focused on different (other) laser approaches that came up, led by Thulium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Tm:YAG) Vapoenucleation (ThuVEP) in 2009 and, finally, transurethral anatomical enucleation with Tm:YAG support (thulium laser enucleation of the prostate, ThuLEP) in 2010. Initially, the discourse on lasers focused on the different properties of lasers rather than technique or surgical anatomy, respectively. In and after 2016, the discussion ultimately moved towards surgical technique and accepting anatomical preparation as the common of all EEP techniques (AEEP). Since then, the unspoken question has been raised, whether lasers are still necessary to perform EEP in light of existing evidence, given the total cost of ownership (TCO) for these generators. This article weighs the current evidence and comes to the conclusion that no evidence of superiority of one modality over another exists with regard to any endpoint. Therefore, in the sense of critical importance, AEEP can be safely and effectively performed without laser technologies and without compromise.