Efficacy of a thermoexpandable metallic prostate stent (Memokath) in elderly patients with urethral obstruction requiring long-term management with urethral Foley catheters

Thermo-expandable intraprostatic nitinol stents in the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction: a consecutive case series

OBJECTIVE

In high-risk patients, prostatic stents may alleviate obstruction at the prostate level. Since 2020 we have used thermo-expandable intraprostatic nitinol stents. Here we document outcomes through the first years with the procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We reviewed  patients who had undergone stent treatment between May 2020 and October 2023. Patient and procedural data, urinary symptoms, complications and side effects were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize outcomes and we evaluated predictors of success and complications using robust multiple regression analyses.

RESULTS

We included 52 consecutive patients with a median age of 82 years (range 71-96) and a median Charlson Comorbidity Index of 6 (3-11). Forty-seven men used indwelling catheters, two used clean intermittent catheterization, and three had severe lower urinary tract symptoms. Stents were placed under general anesthesia, sedation, and local anesthesia in 39, 4, and 9 men, respectively. The median treatment time was 14 min (range 8-40). One complication, in the form of an infection requiring IV antibiotics, occurred. Subsequently, 45 men (87%) were able to void spontaneously without bothersome symptoms. After a median of 11 (2-44) months, 8 men had their stents removed due to recurring symptoms. This gives an overall success rate of 37/52 patients (71%). No predictors of success or complications were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Thermo-expandable intraprostatic nitinol stents demonstrate a high success rate with a low risk of complications and may serve as an alternative to permanent or intermittent catheterization for men who are unable or unwilling to undergo flow-improving surgery.

Efficacy and tolerability of metallic stent in patients with malignant prostatic obstruction secondary to prostatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a self-expandable covered metallic stent in patients with malignant prostatic obstruction secondary to prostate cancer (PC).

METHODS

We reviewed 22 cases of insertion of self-expandable covered metallic stents with barbs. Data were collected about PC status. Uroflowmetry variables, residual urine volume, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QOL), and duration from stent insertion to removal were surveyed. These clinical parameters were compared before and after stent insertion.

RESULTS

The patients with PC showed a mean age of 75.5 ± 6.5 years and mean 5.1 ± 1.9 Charlson comorbidity index. The average flow rate (2.4 ± 1.9 vs 5.9 ± 2.4 mL/s, P = .005), peak flow rate (6.9 ± 6.2 vs 14.1 ± 5.5 mL/s, P = .003), flow time (54.6 ± 29.1 vs 23.6 ± 13.7 s, P = .002), residual urine volume (178.7 ± 195.5 vs 7.0 ± 7.1 mL, P = .004), IPSS (26.2 ± 8.1 vs 8.0 ± 6.5 points, P = .001), and QOL (4.7 ± 1.3 vs 2.4 ± 2.1 points, P = .030) improved between before and after stent insertion, respectively. Pain was the most common complication, but 60% of the patients were managed without any intervention. There were hematuria, urinary retention, urinary frequency, obstruction, and urinary incontinence. However, there was no urinary tract infection due to the stent. The median time to stent removal was 5.7 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The stent was maintained for about 6 months with improved objective and subjective outcomes. The patients with PC, who had a poor comorbidity index and advanced PC status showed a tolerable maintenance period. Self-expandable covered metallic stents can be used for PC patients with a short life expectancy and unsuitability for general anesthesia.

A state-of-art review on the preservation of sexual function among various minimally invasive surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia: Impact on erectile and ejaculatory domains

There is a strong association between benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)/lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and sexual dysfunction. While transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered the standard BPH treatment, it is however associated with a high rate of erectile and ejaculatory dysfunctions. Over the past decade, new and novel minimally invasive BPH therapies have been shown to improve various parameters of voiding domains while minimizing adverse sexual effects. These minimally invasive BPH therapies can be largely be divided into those with cavitating technology (Rezum, Histotripsy, Aquablation), intra-prostatic injections (Botulinum neurotoxin Type A, Fexapotide Triflutate, prostate specific antigen-activated protoxin PRX-302), and mechanical devices which include intraprostatic stents (Urospinal 2™, Memotherm™, Memokath™, and Allium triangular prostatic stent™) and intraprostatic devices (iTIND™, Urolift™), as well as prostatic artery embolization. Published literature on these technologies showed reasonable preservation of erectile function with limited data reported on ejaculatory domain. Further validation of the performance of these novel minimally invasive treatment options for LUTS due to BPH in well-designed and multi-centre studies are desired, to evaluate their role (or lack of such a role) in clinical practice and whether these BPH therapies can provide equivalent standard or better than TURP.

Thermo-expandable prostatic stents for bladder outlet obstruction in the frail and elderly population: An underutilized procedure?

Purpose

To report our outcomes with the use of a thermo-expandable metallic intraprostatic stent (Memokath) for patients with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) secondary to prostatic obstruction, and to assess it is a feasible option for many frail and elderly men unsuitable for surgery.

Materials and Methods

We reviewed patients who underwent insertion of a Memokath stent for BOO over 17 years (January 1999 to December 2015) at one regional center over a long follow-up period (median, 7 years). Patients were selected if they had obstructive urinary symptoms or urinary retention with an indwelling catheter in situ, and were ineligible for transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) under general or spinal anesthesia. Primary outcomes assessed were the improvement in urinary symptoms and voiding parameters, as well as the ability to void spontaneously if catheterized, along with complications.

Results

One hundred forty-four patients who presented with BOO or urinary retention had a Memokath stent inserted. Ninety patients (62.5%) had a successful stent insertion with a significant difference between the median preoperative (550 mL) and postoperative residual volume (80 mL, p<0.0001). Nearly two-thirds of men (64%) returned to unassisted voiding with no increased risk of complications over time. Fifty-four patients (37.5%) experienced stent failure. Main complications requiring stent removal or repositioning were migration, occlusion, refractory urinary retention and irritative voiding symptoms.

Conclusions

In elderly and frail men with BOO deemed unsuitable to undergo TURP, prostatic stent is a safe and practical alternative to long-term catheterization.