Comparison of Safety, Efficacy and Cost Effectiveness of Photoselective Vaporization with Bipolar Vaporization of Prostate in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Safety and efficacy of transurethral holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of transurethral holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) compared to bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (bTUR-P) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODS

A total of 220 BPH patients hospitalized from January 2022 to September 2023 were included in this study. These patients were randomly assigned to HoLEP and bTUR-P groups, with 110 participants in each group. We collected preoperative general information, perioperative data, complications, and postoperative follow-up indicators from both groups of patients.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of patients in both groups were similar, with no statistical significance (P > 0.05). Compared to the bTUR-P group, the HoLEP group exhibited significantly less intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.001), shorter bladder irrigation time (P = 0.002), shorter catheter retention time (P < 0.001), and reduced postoperative hospitalization (P = 0.002). Additionally, the pain score during urination after catheter removal was significantly lower in the HoLEP group (P < 0.001). Postoperative complications occurred in both groups; however, they were less frequent in the HoLEP group (4 cases), primarily consisting of urinary retention and postoperative bleeding. The bTUR-P group experienced more complications (9 cases). Significant reductions in postoperative residual urine volume (RUV) were observed in both groups (P < 0.001). Both groups also showed significant improvements in Quality of Life (QoL) scores and International Prostate Symptom Scores (IPSS), with the HoLEP group demonstrating a more significant decrease in IPSS (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

After comprehensive evaluation, HoLEP was superior to bTUR-P in terms of safety and efficacy. Therefore, HoLEP may be a preferable choice for the treatment of BPH.

Comparison on the Efficacy and Safety of Different Surgical Treatments for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Volume >60 mL: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 10 different surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with volume >60 mL. A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) within a Bayesian framework was performed. A total of 52 parallel-group RCTs included, reporting on 6,947 participants, comparing open prostatectomy (OP), monopolar/bipolar transurethral resection of prostate (monopolar/ bipolar TURP), thulium, holmium and diode laser enucleation of prostate (LEP), bipolar enucleation of prostate, potassium titanyl phosphate laser vaporization of prostate (KTP LVP), bipolar vaporization of prostate (bipolar VP), and laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (laparoscope SP). Compared with OP, laparoscope SP identified better maximal flow rate (Qmax; mean differences [MDs] = 2.89 mL/s) at the 24th month, but bipolar VP demonstrated worse Qmax (MD = −3.20 mL/s) and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS; MD = 2.60) at the 12th month. Holmium LEP (MD = 1.37) demonstrated better International Index of Erectile Function–5 at the 12th month compared with OP. However, compared with OP, KTP LVP demonstrated worse postvoid residual volume (PVR) at the sixth (MD = 10.42 mL) and 12th month (MD = 5.89 mL) and monopolar TURP (MD = 6.9 mL) demonstrated worse PVR at the 12th month. Eight new surgical methods for BPH with volume >60 mL appeared to be superior in safety compared with OP and monopolar TURP due to fewer complications. Bipolar VP and KTP LVP maybe not suitable for prostates more than 60 mL due to short- and middle-term worse Qmax, IPSS, and PVR than OP.

Comparative efficacy and safety of new surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of different endoscopic surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to 31 March 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials comparing vapourisation, resection, and enucleation of the prostate using monopolar, bipolar, or various laser systems (holmium, thulium, potassium titanyl phosphate, or diode) as surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia. The primary outcomes were the maximal flow rate (Qmax) and international prostate symptoms score (IPSS) at 12 months after surgical treatment. Secondary outcomes were Qmax and IPSS values at 6, 24, and 36 months after surgical treatment; perioperative parameters; and surgical complications.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted the study data and performed quality assessments using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The effect sizes were summarised using weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes and odds ratios for binary outcomes. Frequentist approach to the network meta-analysis was used to estimate comparative effects and safety. Ranking probabilities of each treatment were also calculated.

RESULTS

109 trials with a total of 13 676 participants were identified. Nine surgical treatments were evaluated. Enucleation achieved better Qmax and IPSS values than resection and vapourisation methods at six and 12 months after surgical treatment, and the difference maintained up to 24 and 36 months after surgical treatment. For Qmax at 12 months after surgical treatment, the best three methods compared with monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) were bipolar enucleation (mean difference 2.42 mL/s (95% confidence interval 1.11 to 3.73)), diode laser enucleation (1.86 (-0.17 to 3.88)), and holmium laser enucleation (1.07 (0.07 to 2.08)). The worst performing method was diode laser vapourisation (-1.90 (-5.07 to 1.27)). The results of IPSS at 12 months after treatment were similar to Qmax at 12 months after treatment. The best three methods, versus monopolar TURP, were diode laser enucleation (mean difference -1.00 (-2.41 to 0.40)), bipolar enucleation (0.87 (-1.80 to 0.07)), and holmium laser enucleation (-0.84 (-1.51 to 0.58)). The worst performing method was diode laser vapourisation (1.30 (-1.16 to 3.76)). Eight new methods were better at controlling bleeding than monopolar TURP, resulting in a shorter catheterisation duration, reduced postoperative haemoglobin declination, fewer clot retention events, and lower blood transfusion rate. However, short term transient urinary incontinence might still be a concern for enucleation methods, compared with resection methods (odds ratio 1.92, 1.39 to 2.65). No substantial inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence was detected in primary or secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Eight new endoscopic surgical methods for benign prostatic hyperplasia appeared to be superior in safety compared with monopolar TURP. Among these new treatments, enucleation methods showed better Qmax and IPSS values than vapourisation and resection methods.

STUDY REGISTRATION

CRD42018099583.

Comparison of Bipolar Plasma Vaporization versus Standard Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: Surgical Procedures and Clinical Outcomes for Small Prostate Volumes

Bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate (BPVP) is an attractive alternative to resection. There are numerous studies comparing transurethral resection of prostate or photoselective vaporization of the prostate with BPVP; however, there is a lack of data comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) with BPVP. We aimed to compare HoLEP and BPVP with a focus on functional outcomes, safety, and complications. Methods: From January 2017 to June 2018, patients who underwent HoLEP or BPVP for benign prostatic hypertrophy were enrolled in this study. Inclusion criteria were a prostate volume <40 mL measured by transrectal ultrasound, international prostate symptom score (IPSS) >7, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) <15 mL/s, and postvoiding residual volume (PVR) >100 mL. Perioperative and postoperative parameters including IPSS, Qmax, quality of life, PVR, and complications were compared between groups. Results: Sixty-three patients were enrolled in this study. There were small differences in perioperative parameters. Hospital stays and catheterization periods were significantly shorter in the BPVP group. The postoperative complications were comparable between groups. PVR was comparable in both groups except for 1 month postoperatively. The incontinence rate was higher in the HoLEP group, but without statistical significance. Conclusion: In terms of surgical safety and efficacy as well as patient comfort, BPVP is comparable with HoLEP for small prostate volumes. BPVP can be a viable alternative technique in small BPH surgical treatment.

Costs of Managing Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in the Office and Operating Room

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the costs associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) management. Specifically, to compare the costs of medical therapy, office-based procedures, and surgical management from a payer perspective.

RECENT FINDINGS

The American Urological Association released updated guidelines in 2018 for the surgical management of BPH. Over recent years, analyses investigating the cost-effectiveness of the modalities included in these guidelines have been completed. These show relatively newer, minimally-invasive office-based therapies can provide cost-effective alternatives to medical therapy. Likewise, surgical therapies provide a cost-effective means of BPH management, if performed well with low complication rates. However, comparisons of these studies are limited by the biases they contain. Minimally-invasive office-based therapies and well performed surgical therapies for BPH can achieve cost equivalence to combination medical therapy within a few years. Factors such as age, gland size, patient compliance, and surgeon skill should be considered when personalizing treatment recommendations for each patient.