Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of bipolar compared with monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)

Evaluating transurethral resection of the prostate over twenty years: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

The goal of this systematic review is to assess the temporal changes in outcomes and complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) from 2000 to 2022.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 103 randomized clinical trials from PubMed on TURP, involving 8521 patients. Studies were grouped by years: 2000-2004, 2005-2009, 2010-2014, and 2015-2022. We assessed International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Peak Flow (Qmax), Post-void residue of urine (PVR), and post-operative complications. Heterogeneity was ranked as low (I2 < 25%), moderate (I2 = 25-75%), or high (I2 > 75%).

RESULTS

TURP significantly improved IPSS, Qmax, and PVR, with the most recent studies showing superior results in IPSS and Qmax after 3 years compared to 2000-2004 studies. Heterogeneity in PVR was high (I2 = 100%). No negative impact on erectile function was observed. Complication rates included TURP syndrome (2%), bleeding (8%), and blood transfusion (6%), but elevated heterogeneity with difference between the groups was seen in clot evacuation (I2 = 83%) and urinary tract infections (I2 = 82%). Other complications were urinary retention (4%), incontinence (8%), urethral stricture (3%), bladder neck stenosis (2%).

CONCLUSION

In the last 20 years there has not been a clear trend in the results of TURP. The found heterogeneity may indicate a lack of standardization in TURP procedures. However, symptomatic improvement among patients is uniform, which supports this procedure as a historical benchmark surgical treatment for BPH.

Emerging Technologies for the Surgical Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Secondary to Benign Prostatic Obstruction. A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)/benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) aims at ablating prostate adenoma by resection, enucleation, or vaporisation. Apart from established ablation modes according to the European Association of Urology guidelines, various technologies have emerged as safe/effective alternatives but remain under investigation.

OBJECTIVE

To explore short-term benefits/harms of emerging technologies for surgical management of LUTS/BPO.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL via Ovid up to June 18, 2022. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) exploring aquablation, prostatic arterial embolisation (PAE), Rezum, prostatic urethral lift (PUL), and temporary implantable nitinol device (iTIND) versus sham/transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We included ten RCTs (1108 men). Aquablation versus TURP: insignificant change in International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS; mean difference [MD] 0.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.44 to 2.44), quality of life (QoL; MD 0.30, 95% CI -0.81 to 0.21), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax; MD -0.30, 95% CI -3.71 to 3.11), retreatment (risk ratio [RR] 0.18, 95% CI 0.02-1.66), and urinary incontinence (UI; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.26-1.95). PAE versus monopolar TURP (M-TURP): insignificant change in IPSS (MD 3.33, 95% CI -28.39 to 35.05), QoL (MD 0.12, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.54), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5; MD 3.07, 95% CI -1.78 to 7.92), and UI (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01-2.86), and significant change in Qmax (MD -9.52, 95% CI -14.04 to -5.0), favouring M-TURP. PAE versus bipolar TURP: insignificant change in IPSS (MD -2.80, 95% CI -6.61 to 1.01), QoL (MD -0.69, 95% CI -1.46 to 0.08), Qmax (MD -3.51, 95% CI -8.08 to 1.06), UI (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01-2.51), and retreatment (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.19-19.63). PUL versus TURP: insignificant change in QoL (MD 0.40, 95% CI -0.29 to 1.09), UI (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-1.05), and retreatment (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.12-1.86), and significant change in IPSS (MD 3.40, 95% CI 0.22-6.58), and IIEF-5 (MD 3.00, 95% CI 0.41-5.59) and Qmax (MD -9.60, 95% CI -13.44 to -5.76), favouring PUL and TURP, respectively. Rezum and iTIND have not been evaluated in RCTs against TURP to date.

CONCLUSIONS

Supporting evidence for clinical use of aquablation, PAE, PUL, Rezum, and iTIND is very limited. Benefits/harms should be investigated further in high-quality RCTs.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This review summarises the evidence for the clinical use of aquablation, prostatic arterial embolisation (PAE), prostatic urethral lift (PUL), Rezum, and temporary implantable nitinol device (iTIND) to manage lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction. The supporting evidence for the clinical usage of aquablation, PAE, PUL, Rezum, and iTIND is very limited. Benefits and harms should be investigated further in high-quality randomised controlled trials.

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.

Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) versus transperineal laser ablation (TPLA) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): prospective and comparative study

AIM

We aimed to compare the first-year results of Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), the gold standard method, and Transperineal laser ablation (TPLA) techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was designed as a prospective, randomized, controlled, and single-center and was conducted between November 2021 and February 2023. TURP candidates were included in the study. Demographic data and perioperative data were recorded. Preoperative and first-year International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), International Erectile Function Index (IIEF-5), Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction (MSHQ-EjD), QoL, peak urinary flow rate (Qmax), prostate volume (PV) and postvoid residual (PVR) data were recorded.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were included in the study and were assigned to equal numbers of groups. TPLA group had a higher ASA score (p = 0.03). There was improvement in IPSS, Qmax, and PVR parameters compared to baseline values in both groups at 1 year (p < 0.01). The improvement in Qmax was better in the TURP group (p < 0.01). IIEF-5 score was similar between groups (p = 0.83 and p = 0.12, respectively). The MSHQ scores in the first year did not change according to their baseline values in the TPLA group (p = 0.54 and p = 0.34, respectively).

CONCLUSION

According to the first-year results of TPLA, the symptomatic improvement effect without sacrificing ejaculatory functions is comparable to TURP. We think that this method will can be an alternative, especially for patients who want to avoid ejaculatory dysfunction, who have a high risk of anesthesia, and whose anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy cannot be discontinued.

Shifting Trends in Prostate Treatment: A Systematic Review Comparing Transurethral Resection of the Prostate and Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate

Our systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness and suitability of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) as a treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in comparison to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). We analyzed 12 studies involving male participants aged 45-85 years, all of whom had BPH. In our analysis, we compared HoLEP and TURP, with a focus on several primary outcomes, including postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), postvoid residual (PVR) volume, maximum flow rate (Qmax), and changes in sexual function post-treatment. HoLEP demonstrated advantages in certain aspects when compared to TURP. HoLEP generally resulted in an improved postoperative IPSS in some studies, but not all studies showed a significant difference when compared to TURP. HoLEP was associated with improved Qmax in most studies, but one study found no significant difference between HoLEP and TURP. Patients who underwent HoLEP showed improvement in the PVR volume in some studies, while others found no significant change in the PVR volume with either HoLEP or TURP. Some studies reported a reduction in orgasm and ejaculatory scores following TURP, while no significant changes were observed in erectile function, intercourse satisfaction, and overall satisfaction scores. It is worth noting that previous reviews and meta-analyses had limited data on the effects of HoLEP and TURP on sexual dysfunction. TURP is associated with a higher risk of morbidity and mortality, which has led to its replacement with HoLEP as the gold standard for treating BPH, particularly due to its size-independent applicability. HoLEP also demonstrated greater efficacy in the postoperative period.

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.

Correlation of Postoperative Outcomes According to the Amount of Prostatic Tissue Removed in Patients Undergoing Transurethral Resection of the Prostate

OBJECTIVE

The present study assesses the effect of the proportion of tissue resected during transurethral resections of the prostate (TUR-P) on lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and other parameters in patients with a benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-three patients who underwent TUR-P between 2018 and 2021 were assessed prospectively. The patients were divided into two groups according to the percentage of tissue removed (group 1 <30%, group 2 >30% resection). Age, prostate volume, amount of resected tissue, operative time, length of hospital stay, duration of catheterization, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life score (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), and serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (ng/dl) at preoperative and postoperative three months were recorded.

RESULTS

The percentage of tissue removed was 22.2% vs. 48.4% (p = 0.001), IPSS reduction was 77.7% vs. 83.3% (p = 0.048), QoL improvement was 77.2% vs. 84.8% (p = 0.133), Qmax increase was 171.3% vs. 193.5% (p = 0.032), and serum PSA decrease was 56.4% vs. 69.2% (p = 0.049) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. In addition, the operative time was 38.5 vs. 53.6 min (p = 0.001), the length of hospital stay was 2.0 vs. 2.4 days (p = 0.001), and the duration of catheterization average was 4.1 vs. 4.9 days (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Resections of at least 30% of prostatic tissue can provide a significant improvement in the symptoms and parameters related to benign prostatic obstruction, while resections of less than 30% of prostatic tissue can effectively reduce urinary symptoms and improve the quality of life in older adult patients with comorbidities who require shorter operating times.

Prostatic arterial embolization for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

A variety of minimally invasive surgical approaches are available as an alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) is a relatively new, minimally invasive treatment approach.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of PAE compared to other procedures for treatment of LUTS in men with BPH.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings with no restrictions on language of publication or publication status, up to 8 November 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomized studies (NRS, limited to prospective cohort studies with concurrent comparison groups) enrolling men over the age of 40 years with LUTS attributed to BPH undergoing PAE versus TURP or other surgical interventions.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies for inclusion or exclusion and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses by using a random-effects model and interpreted them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used GRADE guidance to rate the certainty of evidence of RCTs and NRSs.  MAIN RESULTS: We found data to inform two comparisons: PAE versus TURP (six RCTs and two NRSs), and PAE versus sham (one RCT). Mean age was 66 years, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 22.8, and prostate volume of participants was 72.8 mL. This abstract focuses on the comparison of PAE versus TURP as the primary topic of interest. Prostatic arterial embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate We included six RCTs and two NRSs with short-term (up to 12 months) follow-up, and two RCTs and one NRS with long-term follow-up (13 to 24 months).  Short-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, there may be little to no difference in urologic symptom score improvement measured by the International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) on a scale from 0 to 35, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms (mean difference [MD] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.37 to 3.81; 6 RCTs, 360 participants; I² = 78%; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in quality of life as measured by the IPSS-quality of life question on a scale from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating worse quality of life between PAE and TURP, respectively (MD 0.28, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.84; 5 RCTs, 300 participants; I² = 63%; low-certainty evidence). While we are very uncertain about the effects of PAE on major adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.97; 4 RCTs, 250 participants; I² = 24%; very low-certainty evidence), PAE likely increases retreatments (RR 3.20, 95% CI 1.41 to 7.27; 4 RCTs, 303 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). PAE may make little to no difference in erectile function measured by the International Index of Erectile Function-5 on a scale from 1 to 25, with higher scores indicating better function (MD -0.50 points, 95% CI -5.88 to 4.88; 2 RCTs, 120 participants; I² = 68%; low-certainty evidence). Based on NRS evidence, PAE may reduce the occurrence of ejaculatory disorders (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.73; 1 NRS, 260 participants; low-certainty evidence). Long-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, PAE may result in little to no difference in urologic symptom scores (MD 2.58 points, 95% CI -1.54 to 6.71; 2 RCTs, 176 participants; I² = 73%; low-certainty evidence) and quality of life (MD 0.50 points, 95% CI -0.03 to 1.04; 2 RCTs, 176 participants; I² = 29%; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about major adverse events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.20 to 4.05; 2 RCTs, 206 participants; I² = 72%; very low-certainty evidence). PAE likely increases retreatments (RR 3.80, 95% CI 1.32 to 10.93; 1 RCT, 81 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). While PAE may result in little to no difference in erectile function (MD 3.09 points, 95% CI -0.76 to 6.94; 1 RCT, 81 participants; low-certainty evidence), PAE may reduce the occurrence of ejaculatory disorders (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.98; 1 RCT, 50 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to TURP, PAE may provide similar improvement in urologic symptom scores and quality of life. While we are very uncertain about major adverse events, PAE likely increases retreatment rates. While erectile function may be similar, PAE may reduce ejaculatory disorders. Certainty of evidence for the outcomes of this review was low or very low except for retreatment (moderate-certainty evidence), signaling that our confidence in the reported effect size is limited or very limited, and that this topic should be better informed by future research.

Short-term efficacy and safety of second generation bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate (B-TUVP) for large benign prostate enlargement: Results from a retrospective feasibility study

Background

To investigate the efficacy and safety of a second-generation bipolar transurethral electro vaporization of the prostate (B-TUVP) with the new oval-shaped electrode for large benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) with prostate volume (PV) ≥100ml.

Materials and methods

100 patients who underwent second-generation B-TUVP with the oval-shaped electrode for male lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) or urinary retention between July 2018 and July 2020 were enrolled in this study. The patients’ characteristics and treatment outcome were retrospectively compared between patients with PV <100ml and ≥100ml.

Results

17/41 (41.5%) cases of PV ≥100ml and 24/59 cases (40.7%) of PV <100ml were catheterised due to urinary retention. The duration of post-operative catheter placement and hospital-stay of PV ≥100ml (3.1±1.3 and 5.6±2.3 days) were not different from PV <100ml (2.7±1.2 and 5.0±2.4 days). In uncatheterised patients (N = 59), post-void residual urine volume (PVR) significantly decreased after surgery in both groups, however, maximum uroflow rate (Q_max) significantly increased after surgery only in PV <100ml but not in PV ≥100ml. Voiding symptoms and patients’ QoL derived from International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS-QoL (IPSS Quality of Life Index) and BPH Impact Index (BII) scores, significantly improved after B-TUVP in both groups. Catheter free status after final B-TUVP among patients with preoperative urinary retention was achieved in 18/24 (75.0%) and 14/17 (82.1%) cases in patient with <100ml and ≥100ml, respectively. There was no significant difference in post-operative Hb after B-TUVP, which was 97.0±5.4% of baseline for PV <100ml and 96.9±6.1% for PV ≥100ml and no TUR syndrome was observed.

Conclusions

This is the first study investigating short-term efficacy and safety of second-generation B-TUVP with the oval-shaped electrode on large BPE. B-TUVP appears to be effective and safe for treating moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms and urinary retention in patients with large BPE.

Holmium laser enucleation versus bipolar transurethral enucleation for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia, which one is better?

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the overall efficacy and safety between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate (B-TUEP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHOD

We systematically searched electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) to identify eligible comparative studies as of July 2021. The parameters including perioperative results, complications, and functional outcomes were evaluated. RevMan version 5.4 was used for the analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies involving 1725 patients were included. HoLEP had lower operative time (p = .03), shorter catheterization time (p = .007), lower bladder irrigation time (p = .01), and higher enucleation weight (p = .01) compared with B-TUEP. However, there were no significant differences between the techniques regarding the length of stay (LOS), hemoglobin drop, transfusion rates, and complications. Furthermore, no significant differences were also observed in postoperative functional outcomes at 1, 3, 6, 12, or 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

HoLEP has more advantages in perioperative parameters compared with B-TUEP, but no significant differences are found regarding functional outcomes and complications. Large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are required to compare the outcomes of these two techniques.

3-T MRI and clinical validation of ultrasound-guided transperineal laser ablation of benign prostatic hyperplasia

Background

Transperineal laser ablation (TPLA) of the prostate is a novel, mini-invasive option for men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). Our aim was to assess the impact of ultrasound-guided TPLA regarding urodynamic improvement and sexual function, monitoring clinical data, postprocedural complications and imaging findings at 3-T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Methods

Forty-four patients aged ≥ 50 affected with moderate to severe LUTS (International Prostate Symptoms score ≥ 12) due to benign prostatic obstruction and refractoriness, intolerance or poor compliance to medical therapies underwent US-guided TPLA between May 2018 and February 2020. Clinical measurements included PSA, uroflowmetry, sexual function assessment (using the International Index of Erectile Function and Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction short form) and quality of life questionnaire. Adverse events were evaluated using the Clavien-Dindo scale. Volume changes were measured by MRI and automatic segmentation software during 1-year follow-up. Registration: NCT04044573 – May 5th, 2018, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov

Results

MRI assessed the changes over time with a 53% mean reduction of adenoma volume and 71% of the ablated area, associated with clinical and functional improvement and resolution of LUTS in all cases. Five of 44 patients (11.3%) had urinary blockage due to clots and required re-catheterisation for 2 weeks. The overall adverse event rate was 7%.

Conclusion

US-guided TPLA performed as a safe, manageable and effective treatment for LUTS. It could be considered an alternative effective mini-invasive procedure to standard treatments for BPH in the outpatient setting.

[Surgical and interventional management of benign prostatic obstruction: Guidelines from the Committee for Male Voiding Disorders of the French Urology Association]

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Committee (CTMH) of the French Urology Association was to propose an update of the guidelines for surgical and interventional management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

METHODS

All available data published on PubMed® between 2018 and 2020 were systematically searched and reviewed. All papers assessing surgical and interventional management of adult patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) were included for analysis. After studies critical analysis, conclusions with level of evidence and French guidelines were elaborated in order to answer the predefined clinical questions.

RESULTS/GUIDELINES

Offer a trans-uretral incision of the prostate to treat patients with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) with a prostate volume<30cm³, without a middle lobe. TUIP increases the chances of preserving ejaculation. Propose mono- or bipolar trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to treat patients with moderate to severe LUTS with a prostate volume between 30 and 80cm³. Vaporization by Greenlight™ or by bipolar energy can be offered as an alternative to TURP. Offer a Greenlight™ laser vaporization to patients at risk of bleeding. Offer endoscopic prostate enucleation to surgically treat patients with moderate to severe LUTS as an alternative to TURP and open prostatectomy (OP). Minimally invasive prostatectomy is an alternative to OP in centers without access to adequate endoscopic procedures. Embolization of the prostatic arteries may be offered in the event of a contraindication or refusal of surgery for prostates with a volume>80cm³. Prostatic uretral lift is an alternative in patients interested in preserving their ejaculatory function and with a prostate volume<70cm³ without a middle lobe. Aquablation and Rezum™ are under evaluation and should be offered in research protocols.

CONCLUSION

Major changes in surgical management of BPO have occurred and aim at reducing morbidity and improving quality of life of patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate vs Monopolar Transurethral Resection of Prostate in the Treatment of Moderate-Large Volume Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aims: To compare outcomes of monopolar vs bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the management of exclusively moderate-large volume prostatic hyperplasia in terms of maximum flow rate as a surrogate for clinical efficacy, duration of catheterization, hospital stay, operative time, resection weight, transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome, acute urinary retention (AUR), clot retention, and blood transfusion. Methods: We conducted a search of electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL), identifying studies comparing the outcomes of monopolar and bipolar TURP in the management of large-volume prostatic hyperplasia. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies were used to assess included studies. Random effects modeling was used to calculate pooled outcome data. Results: Three RCTs and four observational studies were identified, enrolling 496 patients. No difference was observed in the clinical efficacy between each procedure at 3 months postoperatively (p = 0.99), 6 months (p = 0.46), and 12 months (p = 0.29). The use of bipolar TURP was associated with significantly shorter inpatient stay (p = 0.01) and a shorter duration of catheterization (p = 0.05). Monopolar TURP was associated with an increased risk of TUR syndrome (p = 0.03). Operative time (p = 0.58), resection weight (p = 0.16), AUR (p = 0.96), clot retention (p = 0.79), and blood transfusion (p = 0.39) were similar in both groups. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that bipolar TURP in the treatment of moderate-large volume prostatic disease may be associated with a significantly lower rate of TUR syndrome and shortened length of hospital stay, with similar efficacy when compared with monopolar TURP. Further high-quality RCTs with adequate sample sizes are required to compare both monopolar and bipolar TURP to open prostatectomy or laser enucleation in the treatment of exclusively large-volume prostates with stricter definition of size.

Prostatic arterial embolization for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

A variety of minimally invasive surgical approaches are available as an alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) is a relatively new, minimally invasive treatment approach.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of PAE compared to other procedures for treatment of LUTS in men with BPH.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings with no restrictions on language of publication or publication status, up until 25 September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomized studies (NRS, limited to prospective cohort studies with concurrent comparison groups) enrolling men over the age of 40 with LUTS attributed to BPH undergoing PAE versus TURP or other surgical interventions.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies for inclusion or exclusion and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses by using a random-effects model and interpreted them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used GRADE guidance to rate the certainty of evidence of RCTs and NRSs.  MAIN RESULTS: We found data to inform two comparisons: PAE versus TURP (six RCTs and two NRSs), and PAE versus sham (one RCT). Mean age, IPSS, and prostate volume of participants were 66 years, 22.8, and 72.8 mL, respectively. This abstract focuses on the comparison of PAE versus TURP as the primary topic of interest. PAE versus TURP We included six RCTs and two NRSs with short-term (up to 12 months) follow-up and one RCT with long-term follow-up (13 to 24 months).  Short-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, there may be little to no difference in urologic symptom score improvement (mean difference [MD] 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.40 to 3.50; 369 participants; 6 RCTs; I² = 75%; low-certainty evidence) measured by the International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) on a scale from 0 to 35, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms. There may be little to no difference in quality of life (MD 0.16, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.68; 309 participants; 5 RCTs; I² = 56%; low-certainty evidence) as measured by the IPSS quality of life question on a scale from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating worse quality of life between PAE and TURP, respectively. While we are very uncertain about the effects of PAE on major adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 0.71, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.10; 250 participants; 4 RCTs; I² = 26%; very low-certainty evidence), PAE may increase re-treatments (RR 3.64, 95% CI 1.02 to 12.98; 204 participants; 3 RCTs; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence). Based on 18 re-treatments per 1000 men in the TURP group, this corresponds to 47 more (0 more to 214 more) per 1000 men undergoing PAE.   We are very uncertain about the effects on erectile function (MD -0.03, 95% CI -6.35 to 6.29; 129 participants; 2 RCTs; I² = 78%; very low-certainty evidence) measured by the International Index of Erectile Function at 5 on a scale from 1 to 25, with higher scores indicating better function. NRS evidence when available yielded similar results. Based on evidence from NRS, PAE may reduce the occurrence of ejaculatory disorders (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.73; 260 participants; 1 NRS; low-certainty evidence). Longer-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, we are very uncertain about the effects of PAE on urologic symptom scores (MD 0.30, 95% CI -3.17 to 3.77; 95 participants; very low-certainty evidence) compared to TURP. Quality of life may be similar (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.89; 95 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are also very uncertain about major adverse events (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.63 to 6.13; 107 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We did not find evidence on erectile function and ejaculatory disorders. Based on evidence from NRS, PAE may increase re-treatment rates (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.29; 305 participants; low-certainty evidence); based on 56 re-treatments per 1000 men in the TURP group. this corresponds to 143 more (25 more to 430 more) per 1000 men in the PAE group.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to TURP up to 12 months (short-term follow-up), PAE may provide similar improvement in urologic symptom scores and quality of life. While we are very uncertain about major adverse events, PAE may increase re-treatment rates. We are uncertain about erectile function, but PAE may reduce ejaculatory disorders. Longer term (follow-up of 13 to 24 months), we are very uncertain as to how both procedures compare with regard to urologic symptom scores, but quality of life appears to be similar. We are very uncertain about major adverse events but PAE may increase re-treatments. We did not find longer term evidence on erectile function and ejaculatory disorders. Certainty of evidence for the main outcomes of this review was low or very low, signalling that our confidence in the reported effect size is limited or very limited, and that this topic should be better informed by future research.

Incidence and predictors of early and late hospital readmission after transurethral resection of the prostate: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the incidence and predictors of hospital readmission and emergency department (ED) visits in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia treated by transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a linked administrative dataset from Calgary, Canada. Participants were men who underwent their first TURP procedure between 2015 and 2017. We examined patient demographics, and type of surgery (elective or urgent). Comorbidities were scored using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). The primary outcomes were unplanned hospital readmissions and ED visits at 30, 60 and 90 days after TURP. The secondary aim was to identify potential predictors across these groups.

RESULTS

We identified 3059 men, most of whom underwent elective TURP (83%). The mean (sd) patient age was 71.0 (10.0) years. A total of 224 patients (7.4%) were readmitted to the hospital within 30 days, 290 (9.5%) within 60 days, and 339 (11.1%) within 90 days of discharge. The frequency of return visits within 30, 60 and 90 days of TURP were 21.4%, 26% and 28.6%, respectively. The most responsible diagnoses for ED visit within 90 days were haematuria (15.4%) and retention of urine (12.8%). Multivariable analysis showed that age (odds ratio [OR] 1.61, P < 0.001), surgery type (OR 2.20, P < 0.001), and CCI score (OR 2.03, P < 0.001) were independently associated with odds of readmission and ED visits at all time points.

CONCLUSION

Older age, poorer health and urgent surgery predicted return to ED or readmission after TURP; efforts should be made to improve selection, counselling and preoperative optimization based on these risks.

The New American Urological Association Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Clinical Guidelines: 2019 Update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this paper was to analyze the efficacy of the current modalities available to surgically treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

RECENT FINDINGS

There have been significant surgical advancements for the treatment of BPH, including an increasing development and utilization of minimally invasive surgical techniques (MISTs). These procedures have varying outcomes that are critical to understand. In addition, MISTs have important adverse effects, though have minimized effects on sexual function when compared to more invasive surgical techniques. It is important for all urologists to be familiar with the surgical techniques available to treat BPH and the updated American Urological Association (AUA) Guidelines. Further studies evaluating efficacy, safety, and sexual functioning will help guide care in the future and evolve practice.

Anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: The next gold standard? No! (or not yet!)

Most cases of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia are initially managed through medical therapy. In cases that surgery is indicated, the anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (aEEP), first described in 1983, allegedly presents the same safety profile as the best endoscopic non-enucleating procedures and the same long-term functional outcomes as simple prostatectomy. Thus, why aEEP has not yet been consolidated as the gold-standard BPH surgical treatment? The main reasons are as follows: (a) Multiple energy sources and techniques; (b) High costs; (c) Steep learning curve; (d) Rare in-residency training; (e) Reimbursement issues; (f) Outcomes and (g) Complications. We do believe aEEP is an important advance and a "practice-changing" procedure that will play an important role in the BPH surgical options arsenal, especially for larger prostates. However, there is a need to start an in-residency training program, with a mentor guidance, and, over time, the cost will likely be reduced due to greater competition between companies and greater support from health insurers. Considering these points, in the future, EEP may be considered the gold-standard treatment for BPH… but not yet.

Reprint - Bipolar vs. monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction: A Cochrane review

INTRODUCTION

There remains uncertainty regarding the differences in patient outcomes between monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (MTURP) and bipolar TURP (BTURP) in the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out up to March 19, 2019. Methods in the Cochrane Handbook were followed. Certainty of evidence (CoE) was assessed using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

A total of 59 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 8924 participants were included. BTURP probably results in little to no difference in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at 12 months (mean difference -0.24, 95% confidence internal [CI] -0.39--0.09; participants=2531; RCTs=16; moderate CoE) or health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at 12 months (mean difference -0.12, 95% CI -0.25-0.02; participants=2004, RCTs=11; moderate CoE), compared to MTURP. BTURP probably reduces TUR syndrome (relative risk [RR] 0.17, 95% CI 0.09-0.30; participants= 6,745, RCTs=44; moderate CoE) and blood transfusions (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.30-0.59; participants=5727, RCTs=38; moderate CoE), compared to MTURP. BTURP may carry similar risk of urinary incontinence at 12 months (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01-4.06; participants=751; RCTs=4; low CoE), re-TURP (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.44-2.40; participants=652, RCTs=6, I²=0%; low CoE) and erectile dysfunction (International Index of Erectile Function [IIEF-5]) at 12 months (mean difference 0.88, 95% CI -0.56-2.32; RCTs=3; moderate CoE), compared to MTURP.

CONCLUSIONS

BTURP and MTURP probably improve urological symptoms to a similar degree. BTURP probably reduces TUR syndrome and blood transfusion slightly postoperatively. The moderate certainty of evidence available for primary outcomes suggests no need for further RCTs comparing BTURP and MTURP.

Comparative Study of the Effectiveness and Safety of Transurethral Bipolar Plasmakinetic Enucleation of the Prostate and Transurethral Bipolar Plasmakinetic Resection of the Prostate for Massive Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (>80 ml)

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical safety and effectiveness of transurethral bipolar plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) vs. transurethral bipolar plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP) in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) more than 80 ml.

Material/Methods

From June 2015 to February 2019, 179 BPH patients with prostate volume greater than 80 ml were enrolled and separated into a PKEP (n=81) group and a PKRP group (n=98). The patients in the 2 groups were followed up for 6 months. We collected and analyzed data from the international Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), residual urine volume (RUV), quality of life (QOL), maximum urine flow rate (Qmax), and international erectile function index (ILEF-5). The clinical data collected during and after the operation and surgical complications were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

The PKEP group had significantly shorter operation time, bladder flushing time, indwelling catheter time, and hospitalization time, and has less intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative secondary hemorrhage, bladder neck contracture, capsule perforation, and retrograde ejaculation (P<0.05). Compared with the PKRP group, the postoperative IPSS and QOL scores were significantly lower in the PKEP group (P<0.05), while the excision glandular tissue weight and Qmax were significantly improved (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in ILEF-5 scores, RUV, urethral stricture, urinary incontinence, or erectile dysfunction between the 2 groups (p>0.05).

Conclusions

PKEP treatment of BPH with a large volume (>80 ml) has the advantages of complete gland resection, good surgical effect, improved surgical safety, and reduced intraoperative and postoperative complications.

Operative profile, safety and functional outcomes after GreenLight laser prostate surgery: results from a 12 months follow-up multicenter Italian cohort analyses

BACKGROUND

Over the two past decades, GreenLight laser therapy has been considered a valid alternative for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia/benign prostatic obstruction (BPH/BPO). However, the debate on the effectiveness of laser therapy compared to conventional techniques is still open. The aim of our study is to analyze and describe the use of GreenLight laser prostate surgery in Italy, with regard to the surgical techniques performed and the surgical and functional outcomes at mid-term follow-up.

METHODS

From March 2012 to July 2018, patients who underwent GreenLight laser prostate surgery for LUTS due to BPH/BPO from 19 Italian centers were included. The following parameters were evaluated in the population: age, prostate volume, prostate adenoma volume, PSA tot, Q<inf>max</inf> at uroflowmetry (UFM), International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS), previous therapy for LUTS, use of anticoagulants and antiplatelet drugs. We recorded also the kind of anesthesia, mean laser time (min), mean irradiation time (min), TURP conversion/completion rate, postoperative day of catheter removal, postoperative acute urinary retention (AUR), hospital stay, variation of hematocrit (Ht) and hemoglobin levels (Hb). Early complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, the re-operation rate within 30 days and after 30 days, the late complications and the Patient Global Impression of Improvement were also collected. Changes over time in terms of blood loss and functional outcomes (IPSS and Q<inf>max</inf> at the UFM at 6 and 12 months) were tested with Student's test for paired samples. We assumed P≤0.05 as level of statistical significance.

RESULTS

Overall, 1077 were enrolled in the study, 554 (56.4%) were treated with standard vaporization and 523 (48.6%) with anatomical vaporization. Student's t-test for paired samples showed no statistically significant differences in terms of reduction of Ht preoperative vs. Ht postoperative (42.80±3.91 vs. 39.93±5.35 95% CI P=0.3) and preintervention and postintervention Hb levels (14.28±1.46 vs. 13.72 P=0.35). Compared with the preoperative Q<inf>max</inf> (8.60±2.64), the 6- and 12-month UFM showed a significant improvement [19.56±6.29, P<0.01 and 19.99±5.92 P<0.01]. In terms of IPSS variation, compared to the baseline level (22±5.51) the 6- and 12-month follow-up confirmed a significant reduction (8.01±4.41 P<0.01 and 5.81±4.12 P<0.01 respectively). Postoperative complications were CD0, CD1, CD2, CD3, CD4 in 33.0%,35.3%, 2.9%, 0.3%, and 0.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the most numerous surgical series of GreenLight laser vaporization and with the longest follow-up. This technique should be considered as a safe and effective alternative in the treatment of secondary LUTS to BPH.

Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction

BACKGROUND

Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is a well-established surgical method for treatment of men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). This has traditionally been provided as monopolar TURP (MTURP), but morbidity associated with MTURP has led to the introduction of other surgical techniques. In bipolar TURP (BTURP), energy is confined between electrodes at the site of the resectoscope, allowing the use of physiological irrigation medium. There remains uncertainty regarding differences between these surgical methods in terms of patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of bipolar and monopolar TURP.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive systematic electronic literature search was carried out up to 19 March 2019 via CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and WHO ICTRP. Handsearching of abstract proceedings of major urological conferences and of reference lists of included trials, systematic reviews, and health technology assessment reports was undertaken to identify other potentially eligible studies. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared monopolar and bipolar TURP in men (> 18 years) for management of LUTS secondary to BPO.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent review authors screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed eligible RCTs for risk of bias. Statistical analyses were undertaken according to the statistical guidelines presented in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The quality of evidence (QoE) was rated according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 59 RCTs with 8924 participants were included. The mean age of included participants ranged from 59.0 to 74.1 years. Mean prostate volume ranged from 39 mL to 82.6 mL. Primary outcomes BTURP probably results in little to no difference in urological symptoms, as measured by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at 12 months on a scale of 0 to 35, with higher scores reflecting worse symptoms (mean difference (MD) -0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39 to -0.09; participants = 2531; RCTs = 16; I² = 0%; moderate certainty of evidence (CoE), downgraded for study limitations), compared to MTURP. BTURP probably results in little to no difference in bother, as measured by health-related quality of life (HRQoL) score at 12 months on a scale of 0 to 6, with higher scores reflecting greater bother (MD -0.12, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.02; participants = 2004; RCTs = 11; I² = 53%; moderate CoE, downgraded for study limitations), compared to MTURP. BTURP probably reduces transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome events slightly (risk ratio (RR) 0.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.30; participants = 6745; RCTs = 44; I² = 0%; moderate CoE, downgraded for study limitations), compared to MTURP. This corresponds to 20 fewer TUR syndrome events per 1000 participants (95% CI 22 fewer to 17 fewer). Secondary outcomes BTURP may carry a similar risk of urinary incontinence at 12 months (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.06; participants = 751; RCTs = 4; I² = 0%; low CoE, downgraded for study limitations and imprecision), compared to MTURP. This corresponds to four fewer events of urinary incontinence per 1000 participants (95% CI five fewer to 16 more). BTURP probably slightly reduces blood transfusions (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.59; participants = 5727; RCTs = 38; I² = 0%; moderate CoE, downgraded for study limitations), compared to MTURP. This corresponds to 28 fewer events of blood transfusion per 1000 participants (95% CI 34 fewer to 20 fewer). BTURP may result in similar rates of re-TURP (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.40; participants = 652; RCTs = 6; I² = 0%; low CoE, downgraded for study limitations and imprecision). This corresponds to one more re-TURP per 1000 participants (95% CI 19 fewer to 48 more). Erectile function as measured by the International Index of Erectile Function score (IIEF-5) at 12 months on a scale from 5 to 25, with higher scores reflecting better erectile function, appears to be similar (MD 0.88, 95% CI -0.56 to 2.32; RCTs = 3; I² = 68%; moderate CoE, downgraded for study limitations) for the two approaches.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

BTURP and MTURP probably improve urological symptoms, both to a similar degree. BTURP probably reduces both TUR syndrome and postoperative blood transfusion slightly compared to MTURP. The impact of both procedures on erectile function is probably similar. The moderate certainty of evidence available for the primary outcomes of this review suggests that there is no need for further RCTs comparing BTURP and MTURP.

The morbidity associated with a TURP procedure in routine clinical practice, as graded by the modified Clavien-Dindo system

Background: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered the reference surgical method of treating benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) causing obstruction. The procedure still carries a significant risk of perioperative morbidity according to previous reports. The aim of the present study was to disclose complications after TURP undertaken in routine clinical practice at a non-academic center.Methods: All patients with BPE submitted to TURP from January 2010 to December 2012 were evaluated for complications occurring during hospital stay, after discharge up to the end of the third post-operative month and finally for any late endourological re-interventions undertaken up to five years after TURP. All complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo system.Results: In total, 354 men underwent a TURP during the study period. In total, 47% had pre-operative urinary retention. Significant co-morbidity was seen in 17% of men (ASA III-IV). Spinal anaesthesia was applied to 312 men (88%). During hospital stay, major complications, graded as Clavien-Dindo ≥ III, was seen in only eight men (2.3%). Minor complications occurred in 91 men (26%). Between hospital discharge and follow-up visit major complications were noted in 12 men (3.4%). Minor complications occurred in 79 men (22%). The only factor that was associated with an increased risk of a major complication was general anaesthesia. Late complications, requiring an endourological re-intervention, occurred in 30 men (9.7%).Conclusion: TUR-P in routine clinical practice was associated with a low incidence of severe complications. TUR syndrome was very rare. Within five years a small proportion of men require the transurethral intervention to be redone.

Aquablation of the prostate for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

New, minimally invasive surgeries have emerged as alternatives to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Aquablation is a novel, minimally invasive, water-based therapy, combining image guidance and robotics for the removal of prostatic tissue.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of Aquablation for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and LILACS), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings published up to 11 February 2019, with no restrictions on the language or status of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs, as well as non-randomised observational prospective studies with concurrent comparison groups in which participants with BPH who underwent Aquablation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion at each stage, and undertook data extraction and 'Risk of bias' and GRADE assessments of the certainty of the evidence. We considered review outcomes measured up to and including 12 months after randomisation as short-term and beyond 12 months as long-term.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one RCT with 184 participants comparing Aquablation to TURP. The mean age and International Prostate Symptom Score were 65.9 years and 22.6, respectively. The mean prostate volume was 53.2 mL. We only found short-term data for all outcomes based on a single randomised trial.Primary outcomesUp to 12 months, Aquablation likely results in a similar improvement in urologic symptom scores to TURP (mean difference (MD) -0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.51 to 2.39; participants = 174; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the evidence certainty by one level due to study limitations. Aquablation may also result in similar quality of life when compared to TURP (MD 0.27, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.78; participants = 174, low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the evidence certainty by two levels due to study limitations and imprecision. Aquablation may result in little to no difference in major adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.26; participants = 181, very low-certainty evidence) but we are very uncertain of this finding. This would correspond to 15 fewer major adverse events per 1000 participants (95% CI 64 fewer to 116 more). We downgraded the evidence certainty by one level for study limitations and two levels for imprecision.Secondary outcomesUp to 12 months, Aquablation may result in little to no difference in retreatments (RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.18 to 15.83; participants = 181, very low-certainty evidence) but we are very uncertain of this finding. This would correspond to 10 more retreatments per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 fewer to 228 more). We downgraded the evidence certainty by one level due to study limitations and two levels for imprecision.Aquablation may result in little to no difference in erectile function as measured by International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire Erectile Function domain compared to TURP (MD 2.31, 95% CI -0.63 to 5.25; participants = 64, very low-certainty evidence), and may cause slightly less ejaculatory dysfunction than TURP, as measured by Male Sexual Health Questionnaire for Ejaculatory Dysfunction (MD 2.57, 95% CI 0.60 to 4.53; participants = 121, very low-certainty evidence). However, we are very uncertain of both findings. We downgraded the evidence certainty by two levels due to study limitations and one level for imprecision for both outcomes.We did not find other prospective, comparative studies comparing Aquablation to TURP or other procedures such as laser ablation, enucleation, or other minimally invasive therapies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on short-term (up to 12 months) follow-up, the effect of Aquablation on urological symptoms is probably similar to that of TURP (moderate-certainty evidence). The effect on quality of life may also be similar (low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether patients undergoing Aquablation are at higher or lower risk for major adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether Aquablation may result in little to no difference in erectile function but offer a small improvement in preservation of ejaculatory function (both very low-certainty evidence). These conclusions are based on a single study of men with a prostate volume up to 80 mL in size. Longer-term data and comparisons with other modalities appear critical to a more thorough assessment of the role of Aquablation for the treatment of LUTS in men with BPH.

Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes between Button-Type Bipolar Plasma Vaporization and Transurethral Resection for the Prostate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Previous meta-analysis evaluated a limited number of parameters regarding the comparison of BTPV and TURP for BPH. Method: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for literature comparing BTPV with TURP. Data of efficacy (IPSS, Qmax, PVR and QoL) and safety were extracted and evaluated using either SMD or OR with 95% CI. All analyses were performed by RevMan 5.3. Results: Eleven trials with 1690 patients were selected. Compare to BTPV, TURP had better 6-month IPSS (SMD=0.36, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.63), better 1- (SMD=-0.38, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.12), 6- (SMD=-0.73, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.46) and 12-month Qmax (SMD=-0.47, 95% CI -0.85 to -0.10), better 6-month PVR (SMD=1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.48), as well as better 3- (SMD=-0.24, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.01) and 6-month QoL (SMD=-0.62, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.33). However, BTPV had shorter catheterization time (SMD=-0.96, 95% CI -1.12 to -0.79) and hospital stay (SMD=-0.71, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.53), less hemoglobin decrease (SMD=-1.09, 95% CI -1.27 to -0.91) and virtually shorter operation time (SMD=-0.15, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.01). Moreover, BTPV had fewer occurrence of overall complications (OR=0.52, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.69), Clavien III-IV complications (OR=0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.02), blood transfusion (OR=0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.69), hematuria (OR=0.27, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.56) and capsular perforation (OR=0.19, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.48). Subgroup analysis indicated BTPV and bipolar TURP had similar total complications (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.40-2.88, P=0.88) and Clavien III-IV complications (OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.36-5.57, P=0.61) and blood transfusion rate (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.04-1.73, P=0.17). Conclusion: Both TURP and BTPV could significantly improve IPPS, Qmax, PVR and QoL. TURP had slightly better short-term efficacy, while BTPV had better safety. However, subgroup analysis found bipolar TURP and BTPV had similar safety.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of six therapies for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis from payers' perspectives of six treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and to examine positioning of these modalities in the marketplace for the best use of health care funds and quality-of-life benefits for patients.

METHODS

The economic analysis was conducted with a Markov model to compare combination prescription drug therapy (ComboRx), minimally invasive therapies (MITs) including convective radiofrequency (RF) water vapor thermal therapy (Rezūm®), conductive RF thermal therapy (Prostiva®), and prostatic urethral lift (UroLift®), and invasive surgical procedures including photovaporization of the prostate (Greenlight® PVP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Effects assessed with International Prostate Symptom Score, adverse events, and re-treatment rates were estimated from medical literature; treatments effects were modeled using a common baseline score. Starting with each therapy, patients' transitions to more intensive therapies when symptoms returned were simulated in 6-month cycles over 2 years. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for pairs of treatments; uncertainty in ICERs was estimated with probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

ComboRx was least effective and provided one-third of the symptom relief achieved with MITs. UroLift was similar in effectiveness to Prostiva and Rezūm but costs more than twice as much. The cheaper MITs were ~$900 more expensive than the cost of ComboRx generic drugs over 2 years. TURP and PVP provided slightly greater relief of LUTS than MITs at approximately twice the cost over 2 years; typically, they are reserved for treatment of more severe LUTS.

CONCLUSION

The analysis evaluated the costs and symptom relief of six treatment options in the continuum of care from a common baseline of LUTS severity. Identification of treatments for LUTS/BPH that demonstrate cost-effectiveness and provide appreciable symptom relief is paramount as reimbursement for patient care moves from volume-based services to value-based services.

Diminished long-term recovery of peak flow rate (PFR) after robotic prostatectomy in men with baseline PFR <10 mL/s and incidental association with high-risk prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) on uroflowmetry (UF) parameters among men with baseline peak flow rates (PFR) <10 mL/s.

METHODS

A single-surgeon RARP database of 1082 men who underwent prospective UF testing was analyzed. Men filled out International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaires and underwent uroflowmetry and post-void bladder ultrasound before surgery and at each follow-up visit. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on preoperative PFR: those with PFR <10 mL/s (n = 158) and those with PFR ≥10 mL/s (n = 924). Univariate and multivariate regression models tested the association of preoperative characteristics in predicting postoperative PFR improvement. Within the PFR <10 mL/s group, preoperative variables were analyzed to predict pathologic outcomes.

RESULTS

Three months after RARP, men with baseline PFR <10 mL/s had a 3-fold improvement in PFR (from mean of 7.0 to 24.2 mL/s), whereas in men with PFR ≥10 mL/s there was a 50% improvement (from mean of 19.7 to 28.9 mL/s; P < .001). Improvement in PFR remained stable for >5 years, but mean postoperative PFR was 20% lower in men with baseline PFR <10 mL/s. Preoperative prostate-specific antigen (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.95) and PFR (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.34-0.80) were independent predictors of the percentage improvement in men with baseline PFR <10 mL/s. Preoperative PFR ≤7 mL/s was an independent predictor of Gleason score ≥8 (P = .016), seminal vesicle invasion (P = .010), and lymph node invasion (0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

After RARP, PFR improved significantly, with the improvement persisting over long-term follow-up. However, men with baseline PFR <10 mL/s had a 20% lower postoperative PFR over 5 years, suggesting permanent damage to the bladder and the need for early treatment to maintain bladder health. There appears to be an association between baseline PFR ≤7 mL/s and adverse pathologic features.

Bipolar vs monopolar resection of bladder tumours of >3 cm in patients maintained on low-dose aspirin: A randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of bipolar vs monopolar transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) in patients maintained on low-dose aspirin with tumours >3 cm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective randomised single-centre study was performed including 200 patients with bladder tumours of >3 cm, as measured by ultrasonography. All patients were using low-dose aspirin (81 mg/day), which was not stopped in the perioperative period. Patients were randomised into two groups: Group A, monopolar TURBT (M-TURBT); Group B, bipolar TURBT (B-TURBT). The primary endpoint of the study was the decrease in postoperative haemoglobin (Hb) concentration measured using an automated cell counter. The secondary endpoints of the study were intraoperative blood transfusion or the occurrence of urethral trauma during cystoscopy and the need for re-coagulation.

RESULTS

The postoperative reduction in Hb concentration, was significantly lower in the B-TURBT group [mean (SD) 0.55 (0.26) g/dL] compared with the M-TURBT group [mean (SD) 1.24 (0.61) g/dL] (P < 0.001). There was also a significant difference (in favour of B-TURBT) between the groups in the mean postoperative reduction in haematocrit and the mean postoperative hospital stay. There was no significant difference between the groups for the occurrence of obturator jerk, bladder perforation, and the need for blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION

B-TURBT in patients maintained on low-dose aspirin is better than M-TURBT for minimising postoperative drop in Hb concentration.

Bipolar versus monopolar resection of benign prostate hyperplasia: a comparison of plasma electrolytes, hemoglobin and TUR syndrome

BACKGROUND

Bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) are both widely used for surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Systemic absorption of irrigation fluids during TURP operations leads to variations in blood chemistry. The aim of this prospective clinical study was to compare two different surgical techniques and the systemic effects of irrigation solutions (5 % mannitol vs. 0.9 % sodium chloride) under standardized anesthesia care.

METHODS

Fifty-two patients who were scheduled for elective TURP were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into two groups; the group M; 5 % mannitol was used for irrigation and the group B; 0.9 % sodium chloride was used for irrigation. Spinal anesthesia was performed to all patients. The patients' demographics, prostate volumes, hemodynamic parameters, volumes of irrigation, and IV fluids were recorded. Serum electrolytes (Na+, K+) and hemoglobin (Hb) were analyzed in blood samples taken before the operation (control), at the 45th min of the operation (1st measurement), and 1 h after the end of the surgery (2nd measurement) and recorded.

RESULTS

The Na+ value of group M was significantly lower in both the 1st and 2nd measurements compared with the control value (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001). Na+ values of group M were also significantly lower than group B in both the 1st and 2nd measurements (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001). The change in Na+ levels was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.001) in group M, whereas the intergroup changes were not statistically significant in group B.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated that bipolar resection coupled with 0.9 % sodium chloride has minimal effects on serum sodium levels compared with monopolar resection. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02681471.

[Transurethral resection of the prostate]

Symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are the most common reason why patients consult a urologist. Despite the rise of new minimally invasive technologies, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the most commonly used procedure (at 84 %) to treat BPH patients in Germany. The continued popularity of this procedure can be explained by three main reasons: a robust, simple technique, an until now unsurpassed efficacy and-with regard to the risk-benefit ratio-a low morbidity. Following TURP, the mean Qmax is 19-20 ml/s and the mean IPSS is 6. BPH recurrence occurs in 2-7 % of patients within 8-22 years following TURP. Regarding clinical efficacy, meta-analyses now show relevant differences between monopolar and bipolar (B) TURP. However, B‑TURP seems to be favourable considering potential complications. Clot retention with an incidence of 1-5 % is the most common acute complication and urethral strictures with an incidence of 2-9 % are the most common long-term complications of TURP. TUR syndrome is nowadays a clinical rarity. However, many complications can be avoided by a proper resection technique. TURP is still the standard in surgical BPH therapy.

Morbidity and mortality after surgery for lower urinary tract symptoms: a study of 95 577 cases from a nationwide German health insurance database

BACKGROUND

Little real-world data is available on the comparison of different methods in surgery for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic obstruction in terms of complications. The objective was to evaluate the proportions of TURP, open prostatectomy (OP) and laser-based surgical approaches over time and to analyse the effect of approach on complication rates.

METHODS

Using data of the German local healthcare funds (Allgemeine Ortskrankenkassen (AOK)), we identified 95 577 cases with a primary diagnosis of hyperplasia of prostate who received TURP, laser vaporisation (LVP), laser enucleation (LEP) of the prostate or OP between 2008 and 2013. Univariable logistic regression was used to analyse proportions of surgical approach over time, and the effect of surgical method on outcomes was analysed by means of multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

The proportion of TURP decreased from 83.4% in 2008 to 78.7% in 2013 (P<0.001). Relative to TURP and adjusting for age, co-morbidities, AOK hospital volume, year of surgery and antithrombotic medication, OP had increased mortality (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, P<0.05), transfusions (OR 5.20, P<0.001) and adverse events (OR 2.17, P<0.001), and lower re-interventions for bleeding (OR 0.75, P<0.001) and long-term re-interventions (OR 0.55, P<0.001). LVP carried a lower risk of transfusions (OR 0.57, P<0.001) and re-interventions for bleeding (OR 0.76, P<0.001), but a higher risk of long-term re-interventions (OR 1.43, P<0.001). LEP had increased re-interventions for bleeding (OR 1.35, P<0.01). Complications were also dependent on age and co-morbidity. Limitations include the lack of clinical information and functional results.

CONCLUSIONS

OP has the greatest risks of complication despite a low re-intervention rate. LVP demonstrated favourable results for transfusion and bleeding, but increased long-term re-interventions compared with TURP, while LEP showed increased re-interventions for bleeding. Findings support a careful indication and choice of method for surgery for LUTS, taking age and co-morbidities into account.

Monopolar versus bipolar transurethral resection of prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: Operative outcomes and surgeon preferences, a real-world scenario

Context:

Monopolar transurethral resection of prostate (M-TURP) is considered the gold standard for the management of bladder outlet obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Its newly introduced modification, bipolar TURP (B-TURP), promises to overcome its most prominent shortcomings, namely bleeding and dilutional hyponatremia. Literature is conflicting regarding merits of B-TURP over M-TURP.

Aims:

To find a difference, if any, in perioperative outcomes between M-TURP and B-TURP in a real-wold setting.

Settings and Design:

Prospective nonrandomized study.

Subjects and Methods:

Operative outcomes of patients undergoing M-TURP and B-TURP from February 2014 to October 2015 were compared.

Statistical Analysis Used:

Categorical data were compared by Fischer exact test and numerical data were compared by independent samples Mann–Whitney U-test. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

The mean size of prostate operated by bipolar technology was significantly greater than those operated by monopolar technology (38.12 ± 9.59 cc vs. 66.49 ± 22.95 cc; P < 0.001). The mean fall in postoperative serum sodium concentration was 0.99 ± 0.76 mEq/L for the B-TURP group as compared to 3.60 ± 2.89 mEq/L for the M-TURP group (P < 0.001). The mean drop in postoperative hemoglobin concentration (P = 0.28) was statistically insignificant, even though larger glands were operated by B-TURP. There were three instances of the transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome in the M-TURP group whereas no TUR syndrome occurred in the B-TURP group.

Conclusions:

In spite of various contrary viewpoints in literature, surgeons prefer to operate on larger prostates using bipolar technology. B-TURP definitely reduces the incidence of bleeding and dilutional hyponatremia, making it a contender to replace M-TURP as the new gold standard.

Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate vs Plasmakinetic Resection of the Prostate: A Randomized Prospective Trial With 12-Month Follow-up in Mainland China

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term efficacy and safety results of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) and plasmakinetic resection of prostate (PKRP), 2 methods of treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-related lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in mainland China.

METHODS

One hundred twenty patients with LUTS secondary to BPH were randomly divided into 2 groups: PVP group (n = 61) and PKRP group (n = 59). Perioperative data and postoperative complications were recorded for both groups. Patients were followed up for 12 months after treatment.

RESULTS

Compared with PKRP, PVP required a longer operation time (56 vs 41 minutes; P <.01). PVP also needed shorter catheterization time (2.4 vs 3.5 days; P <.01) and shorter length of hospitalization (3.5 vs 5.1 days; P <.01). International Prostate Symptom Score, Qmax, and quality of life score were significantly improved for both groups after surgery, and no significant differences were apparent between the 2 groups, for up to 12 months. Short-term complications were assessed in regard to necessity of blood transfusion (1 vs 1), clot retention (1 vs 0), reoperation (1 vs 0), incontinence (0 vs 0), urethral stricture (1 vs 0), and retrograde ejaculation (4 vs 6) in the PVP vs PKRP groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In patients with BPH-related LUTS, PVP may be a superior treatment to PKRP as it relates to the endpoints of this study, with short-term results after a 12-month follow-up as length of hospital stay and catheterization time needed were both less than what was required for PKRP. Long-term comparative data are required to clearly define the role of PVP and PKRP in patients.

Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: safe in patients with high surgical risk

Here, we compared the effects of bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (B-TURP, M-TURP) for treating elderly patients (≥75 years) with benign prostatic hyperplasia(BPH) who had internal comorbidities. Eligible BPH patients were aged ≥75 years and had at least one internal comorbidity. In this open-label, prospective trial, patients were assigned to B-TURP (n = 75) and M-TURP (n = 88) groups. Data on prostate volume (PV), urination, and time during perioperative period were compared; data associated with urination and complications at one year postoperatively were also compared. Finally, follow-up data were available for 68 and 81 patients in the B-TURP and M-TURP group, respectively. No deaths were recorded. Intraoperative bleeding was lower and irrigation time, indwelling catheter time, and hospital stay were shorter in the B-TURP group than in the M-TURP group (p < 0.001). No difference was observed with respect to operation time (p = 0.058). At one year after the operation, differences with respect to urination and complications were not significant. In conclusion, Short-term efficacy of B-TURP or M-TURP was satisfactory for elderly patients with BPH who had internal comorbidities. Besides, B-TURP is a more sensible choice because it has a lower prevalence of adverse effects.