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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

A prospective analysis of thulium laser enucleation in benign prostatic hyperplasia comparing low- and high-power approaches for prostates exceeding 80 g

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the perioperative and functional outcomes of low-power and high-power thulium:YAG VapoEnucleation (ThuVEP) of the prostate for the treatment of large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) (> 80 ml).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective analysis of 80 patients with symptomatic BPO and prostatic enlargement (more than 80 ml) was conducted. They were divided randomly into two groups (40 patients in each group). One group was treated with low-power ThuVEP, and the other group was treated with high-power ThuVEP. All patients were assessed preoperatively and early postoperatively, and 12-month follow-up data were analyzed. The complications were noted and classified according to the modified Clavien classification system.

RESULTS

The mean age at surgery was 68 (± 6.1) years, and the mean prostate volume was 112 (± 20.1) cc, and there were no differences between the groups (p = 0.457). The mean operative time was 88.4 ± 11.79 min for group A and 93.4 ± 16.34 min for group B, while the mean enucleation time was 59.68 ± 7.24 min for group A and 63.13 ± 10.75 min for group B. There were no significant differences between the groups regarding catheterization time and postoperative stay. The quality of life (QoL), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoiding residual urine (PVR), and prostate volume improved significantly after treatment and were not significantly different between those treated with the different energies. The incidence of complications was low and did not differ between both the groups.

CONCLUSION

Low-power ThuVEP is feasible, safe, and effective with comparable results with high-power ThuVEP in the treatment of BPO.

The prospective evaluation of learning curve of bipolar anatomic endoscopic prostate enucleation (AEEP) with Herrmann's vapoenucleation probe

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the learning curve of Bipolar Endoscopic Prostate Enucleation (BIPOLEP) in benign prostate enlargement without a mentorship.

METHODS

The prospective data of 55 patients underwent BIPOLEP surgery by a single surgeon during 3 years were evaluated. The demographic, peri-operative and follow-up data were recorded. Trifecta was defined as a combination of complete enucleation and morcellation within < 90 min and without any conversion to standard TURP. Pentafecta was defined as a combination of Trifecta without postoperative complications or stress urinary incontinence at 3 months. The learning curve was considered to have been overcome when the surgeon obtained Trifecta/Pentafecta in four consecutive patients.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study group was 67.9 ± 6.8 years with mean prostate volume of 102.3 ± 56.4 ml. The mean operation time and enucleation time were 103.5 ± 41.1 and 65.78 ± 22.6 min, respectively. Trifecta and Pentafecta were achieved in 23rd (from 19th to 23rd) and 34th (from 30 to 34th) patients, respectively. Among the seven consecutive patients between Trifecta and Pentafecta, prostate capsule perforation was occurred during the surgery in four patients (26th, 27th and 29th patients). The mean follow-up duration was 16.7 ± 6.4 (3-24 months, range) months. Urethral stricture was observed in four (7. 2%) patients while bladder neck contracture was observed 1 (1.8%) patient. After the 3rd month, no patient reported stress incontinence.

CONCLUSION

Bipolar endoscopic enucleation of prostate is a safe surgical method and has similar and/or short learning curve compared to HOLEP even without a mentorship program.

Transurethral versus open enucleation of the prostate in Sweden - a retrospective comparative cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if treatment with transurethral enucleation of the prostate (TUEP) during the learning curve is as efficient and safe in the short term as transvesical open prostate enucleation (OPE), in patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) > 80 ml in a population in Sweden.  Methods: 54 patients with ultrasound verified BPO > 80 ml and indication for surgery underwent TUEP or OPE between 2013 and 2019. Peri- and postoperative outcome variables regarding voiding efficiency and morbidity from 20 OPE at Skåne University Hospital (SUS) and from the first 34 TUEP performed at SUS and Ystad Hospital were retrospectively assembled. Follow-up data from the first 6 postoperative months were collected by chart review.

RESULTS

Intraoperative bleeding during TUEP was less than in OPE (225 ml vs. 1,000 ml). TUEP took longer surgery time than OPE (210 vs. 150 min.). Within 30 days postoperatively, bleeding occurred less often after TUEP (23% vs. 40%), requiring one fourth of the blood transfusions given after OPE. After TUEP, patients had shorter hospitalisation (3 days vs. 7 days) and catheterisation time (3 days vs. 12 days). During the 6-month follow-up period, incontinence and UTI defined as symtomatic significant bacteriuria (urinary culture) were observed as main complications after TUEP and OPE. Functional outcome data availability (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS] questionnaire, uroflowmetry, residual urine) were limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with TUEP during the learning curve led to less bleeding, shorter hospitalisation- and catheterisation time than treatment with OPE. However, surgery time was shorter with OPE. There were no major differences between the groups concerning mid-term functional outcomes, with the reservation of an inconsistent follow-up.

Comparison of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate with Bipolar Plasmakinetic Enucleation of the Prostate: A Randomized, Prospective Controlled Trial at Midterm Follow-Up

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) with bipolar plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (BPEP) in the surgical management of obstructive benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) at midterm (minimum 3 years) follow-up. Patients and Methods: Between June 2016 and January 2018, 181 patients who had bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms or refractory retention of urine due to obstructive BPH (prostate 32-128 g) were randomized to undergo either HoLEP or BPEP using the en bloc technique. Patient's age, associated comorbidities, baseline International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR) urine, and quality of life (QoL) scores were comparable in both groups. From each group, 86 patients who completed regular follow-up for 36 months were analyzed. Results: The mean preoperative prostate volume was comparable in both groups (HoLEP group 61.09 ± 28.25 and BPEP group 62.66 ± 27.37 g). The HoLEP group showed a significantly better enucleation time (27.87 ± 13.18 minutes vs 38.37 ± 14.55 minutes), operative time (30.91 ± 14.82 minutes vs 41.63 ± 16.19 minutes), and enucleation efficiency (1.69 ± 0.28 vs 1.28 ± 0.06 g/min), with a lesser drop in hemoglobin (0.46 ± 0.23 vs 0.87 ± 0.26 g/dL). Bladder irrigation time, catheterization time, hospital stay, and sodium drop were comparable in both groups. One patient in the BPEP group needed clot evacuation. Both groups showed a significant reduction in IPSS, improvement in Qmax, reduction in PVR, and improved QoL scores at 3 months, which was maintained till 36 months. At the 3-year follow-up, two patients in each group needed reintervention for bladder neck contracture. Conclusions: HoLEP and BPEP provide comparable safety and efficacy in the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction due to BPH at the immediate and midterm (3-5 years) follow-up. HoLEP has an advantage of being faster with lesser perioperative morbidity.

Network Meta-Analysis of the Treatment Safety and Efficacy of Different Lasers in Prostate Enucleation

Purpose: This study aimed to compare different laser systems for the enucleation of benign prostate hyperplasia. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on different lasers for prostate enucleation were searched from PubMed, Embase, and CNKI databases. Pairwise and network meta-analyis (NMA) were performed to analyze the outcome regarding surgery time, complications, short-term postvoid residual (PVR), long-term PVR, and short-term international prostate symptom score (IPSS), long-term IPSS, short-term maximum urine flow rate (Qmax), and long-term Qmax. RevMan software was used for paired meta-analysis. Considering the variance uncertainty caused by the different source regions of RCTs and the different primary conditions of surgeons and patients, this study uses Bayesian NMA conducted with ADDIS software to compare different treatment methods indirectly. Node-splitting analysis was used to test inconsistency for closed-loop indirect comparison. Results: Nine studies were included in this study, involving four types of lasers: diode laser, holmium laser, thulium laser, and greenlight laser. In safety paired meta-analysis, holmium laser could bring more complication risk than thulium laser (odds ratio: 2.70, 95% confidential interval [CI]: 1.79-4.00, p < 0.001), and no other significant result was detected. In the efficacy comparisons, holmium laser could offer better postoperative long-term PVR (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.35, 95%CI: -0.62, -0.09, p = 0.011), better postoperative long-term IPSS (SMD: -0.30, 95%CI: -0.57, -0.04, p = 0.011), better postoperative short-term Qmax (SMD: 0.44, 95%CI: 0.17, 0.70, p = 0.001) compared with greenlight laser. According to the results of NMA, greenlight laser may bring more complication risks when applied to prostate enucleation than the other three lasers. Thulium laser may be the recommended laser system for prostate enucleation. Conclusion: Thulium laser may be the recommended laser system since it can bring less complication risk with comparable efficacy. More RCTs are still needed to validate this study.

Randomized prospective trial of the severity of irritative symptoms after HoLEP vs ThuFLEP

PURPOSE

To compare the short-term postoperative functional outcomes and severity of irritative symptoms following holmium and thulium fiber laser enucleation (HoLEP and ThuFLEP).

METHODS

This prospective randomized single-blinded study was performed in accordance with CONSORT. The inclusion criteria were IPSS > 20 or Qmax < 10 ml/s. Patients were randomized between HoLEP and ThuFLEP. Demographics, objective data (PSA, prostate volume, etc.), data on urinary and sexual function (IPSS, IIEF, QoL, QUID, Qmax, ICIQ-MLUTS) were collected. Detailed perioperative information and postoperative data on functional outcomes at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 weeks and 6 months were collected.

RESULTS

Data on 163 participants were included (77-HoLEP, 86-ThuFLEP). No differences were found in surgery duration; number of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo I-III), catheterization time and hospital stay. Functional outcomes up to 6 months didn't differ between the groups (IPPS, IIEF, QoL, QUID, ICIQ-MLUTS, Qmax, p > 0.05). Total ICIQ-MLUTS, bother and voiding scores at 1 and 3 months significantly increased compared with the baseline in both groups (p < 0.05). No difference between the groups were observed. In HoLEP the SUI series rate was 1.3% and 1.3% after 3 and 6 months following the procedure; in ThuFLEP: it was 3.5% and 2.3% respectively (p = 0.35 and p = 0.54).

CONCLUSION

The preliminary results of the study showed no apparent differences in functional outcomes (IPSS, Qmax), rate of SUI or irritative symptoms. Both ThuFLEP and HoLEP are efficient ways of treating benign prostatic obstruction. Both surgeries are comparable in terms of duration and postoperative complication rates.

Thulium laser enucleation of prostate versus laparoscopic trans-vesical simple prostatectomy in the treatment of large benign prostatic hyperplasia: head-to-head comparison

Objectives:

To compare thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP) versus laparoscopic trans-vesical simple prostatectomy (LSP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

Materials and Methods:

Data of patients who underwent surgery for “large” BPH (>80mL) at three Institutions were collected and analyzed. Two institutions performed ThuLEP only; the third institution performed LSP only. Preoperative (indwelling catheter status, prostate volume (PVol), hemoglobin (Hb), Q_max, post-voiding residual volume (PVR), IPSS, QoL, IIEF-5) and perioperative data (operative time, enucleated adenoma, catheterization time, length of stay, Hb-drop, complications) were compared. Functional (Q_max, PVR, %ΔQ_max) and patient-reported outcomes (IPSS, QoL, IIEF-5, %ΔIPSS, %ΔQoL) were compared at last follow-up.

Results:

80 and 115 patients underwent LSP and ThuLEP, respectively. At baseline, median PVol was 130 versus 120mL, p <0.001; Q_max 9.6 vs. 7.1mL/s, p=0.005; IPSS 21 versus 25, p <0.001. Groups were comparable in terms of intraoperative complications (1 during LSP vs. 3 during ThuLEP) and transfusions (1 per group). Differences in terms of operative time (156 vs. 92 minutes, p <0.001), Hb-drop (-2.5 vs. −0.9g/dL, p <0.001), catheterization time (5 vs. 2 days, p <0.001) and postoperative complications (13.8% vs. 0, p <0.001) favored ThuLEP. At median follow-up of 40 months after LSP versus 30 after ThuLEP (p <0.001), Q_max improved by 226% vs. 205% (p=0.5), IPSS decreased by 88% versus 85% (p=0.9), QoL decreased by 80% with IIEF-5 remaining almost unmodified for both the approaches.

Conclusions:

Our analysis showed that LSP and ThuLEP are comparable in relieving from BPO and improving the patient-reported outcomes. Invasiveness of LSP is more significant.

The efficacy of a suppository based on Phenolmicin P3 and Bosexil (Mictalase®) in control of irritative symptoms in patients undergoing thulium laser enucleation of prostate: a single-center, randomized, controlled, open label, phase III study

Background

Several studies described post-operative irritative symptoms after laser enucleation of prostate, sometimes associated with urge incontinence, probably linked to laser-induced prostatic capsule irritation, and potential for lower urinary tract infections We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a suppository based on Phenolmicin P3 and Bosexil (Mictalase®) in control of irritative symptoms in patients undergoing thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP).

Methods

In this single-center, prospective, randomized, open label, phase-III study, patients with indication to ThuLEP were enrolled (Dec2019–Feb2021—Institutional ethics committee STS CE Lazio approval no.1/N-726—ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05130918). The report conformed to CONSORT 2010 guidelines. Eligible patients were 1:1 randomized. Randomization defined Group A: patients who were administered Mictalase® suppositories twice a day for 5 days, then once a day for other 10 days; Group B: patients who did not receive Mictalase® (“controls”). Study endpoints were evaluated at 15 and 30 days postoperation. Primary endpoint included evaluation of effects of the suppository on irritative symptoms by administering IPSS + QoL questionnaire. Secondary endpoint included evaluation of effects on urinary tract infections by performance of urinalysis with urine culture.

Results

111 patients were randomized: 56 in Group A received Mictalase®. Baseline and perioperative data were comparable. At 15-days, no significant differences were found in terms of IPSS + QoL scores and urinalysis parameters. A significant difference in the rate of positive urine cultures favored Group A (p = 0.04). At 30-days follow-up, significant differences were found in median IPSS score (6 [IQR 3–11] versus 10 [5–13], Group A vs B, respectively, p = 0.02). Urinalysis parameters and rate of positive urine cultures were not significantly different.

Conclusions

The present randomized trial investigated the efficacy of Mictalase® in control of irritative symptoms and prevention of lower urinary tract infections in patients undergoing ThuLEP. IPSS improvement 30-days postoperation was more pronounced in patients who received Mictalase®. Lower rate of positive urine culture favored Mictalase® group 15-days postoperatively.

Trial registration

The clinical trial has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on November 23rd, 2021—Registration number NCT05130918.

Safety and Efficacy of Laser Enucleation of the Prostate in Elderly Patients - A Narrative Review

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common health condition in aging men resulting in lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and low quality of life (QoL). We aimed to review studies on laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) due to LUTS in elderly patients (>65 years) comparing different age groups, particularly considering functional outcomes, safety, and perioperative complications. A comprehensive search was conducted using the PubMed-MEDLINE, Web of Science, Wiley Online Library and Cochrane Library databases over the last 10 years until 7 October 2021 with the following search terms solely or in combination: “laser enucleation”, “prostate”, “laser prostatectomy”, “aging”, “elderly patients”, “older patients” and “age”. We identified 12 articles for inclusion in our analysis. Five studies focussed mainly on holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), one compared HoLEP to other laser prostatectomy procedures, two studies examined thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP), and two studies focused on GreenLight laser, one study focussed on potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) laser, and another study compared laser prostatectomy to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). These studies showed that LEP improved IPSS, Qmax and QoL compared to baseline regardless of age; no significant difference was reported among age groups. Although ASA scores and anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy rates are higher in elderly patients, studies revealed no significant difference in perioperative complication rates between age groups. Laser enucleation of the prostate is an effective and safe procedure in elderly patients, resulting in good functional outcomes, low morbidity, and few perioperative complications.

Ejaculations and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: An Impossible Compromise? A Comprehensive Review

Background: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is commonly responsible for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men aged 50 or over. Sexual dysfunctions, such as ejaculatory disorders (EjD), go along with LUTS but are frequently overlooked in the initial evaluation. This review aimed to detail BPH-related EjD, as well as their modifications by medical, surgical, and interventional treatments. Methods: We conducted a narrative review looking for publications between 1990 and 2020, regarding physiopathology, epidemiology, evaluation, and therapeutic management (medical, surgical, and interventional) of BPH-related EjD. Results: Sixty-five articles were included in our final analysis. Forty-six percent of men presenting with LUTS reported EjD. If the prevalence increases with age and LUTS severity, the functional impairment is not correlated with age. Several self-questionnaires evaluated the sexual function, but only four approaches are specific to EjD. Medical therapies were exposed to anejaculation, rather than retrograde ejaculation (RE) (4–30% (alpha-blockers), 4–18% (5-alpha-reductase inhibitors)). Regarding surgical therapies, trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and incision of the prostate (TUIP) are associated with 50–70% and 21–35% of RE. The RE rate is important after open simple prostatectomy but can be reduced with robotic approaches and urethral sparing techniques (19%). Anatomic endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) with or without a laser source is associated with an 11–36% RE rate, according to supramontanal preservation. Recent surgical techniques (Rezum©, Aquablation©, or Urolift©) were developed to preserve antegrade ejaculation with promising short-term results. Regardless of the surgical approach, anatomic studies suggest that the preservation of peri-montanal tissue (7.5 mm laterally; 10 mm proximally) is primordial to avoid post-operative RE. Finally, prostate artery embolization (PAE) limits the RE rate but exposes it to a 12 months 10% re-intervention rate. Conclusion: EjD concerns almost half of the patients presenting BPH-related LUTS. Initial evaluation of EjD impairment is primordial before medical or surgical therapy. Peri-montanal tissue preservation represents a key point for antegrade ejaculation preservation, regardless of the surgical option.

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.

Is thulium laser vapoenucleation of the prostate equally safe and effective in elderly patients? A propensity score matched analysis of early perioperative and functional outcomes

PURPOSE

To evaluate if thulium laser vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) is equally safe and effective in a selected cohort of elderly patients when compared to "younger" patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent ThuVEP between September 2018 and February 2020. After application of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, patients were stratified according to the 75 years-old cut-off point suggested by the WHO. Group A included patients ≤75 years-old; Group B included patients >75 years-old. Preoperative assessment included urological consultation, prostate specific antigen (PSA), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life index, transrectal ultrasound to estimate prostate volume (PVol), and uroflowmetry to assess preoperative Qmax, Qave and post-void residual volume (PVR). Perioperative and postoperative data were analyzed during 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

After propensity-score analysis, 51 versus 51 patients were 1:1 matched according to PVol, PSA, Qmax, IPSS and QoL. Patients were comparable at baseline excluding age (65 (IQR 59-70) versus 79 (IQR 77-82) years, Group A versus B, respectively, P-value <.001). No differences were found in terms of hemoglobin drop, complications rate, catheterization time and length of hospital stay. Group A (younger) patients had more significant improvement in 30-days absolute Qmax, Qave and ΔQmax. At 90-days follow-up, the differences between the groups disappeared. Within the 90-days follow-up, no significant differences were found in the readmission rate, with no need of reinterventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In our hands, even in elderly patients affected by BPH, ThuVEP appears to be a safe and effective treatment option.

Shedding light on polypragmasy of pain after transurethral prostate surgery procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the incidences of post-operative pelvic pain (PPP) in patients undergoing ablation, enucleation and conventional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Using MEDLINE via PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL, randomised control trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting PPP rates post-ablation, enucleation or TURP were identified. The risk of biases (RoB) in RCTs and observation studies were assessed using the Cochrane RoB1.0 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively.

RESULTS

62 studies were included for qualitative analysis, while 51 of them reported number of patients with PPP post-intervention. Three observational studies and 13 RCTs compared the rates of PPP in patients undergoing ablation, enucleation or TURP. The most reported types of PPP are dysuria, abdominal pain and irritative symptoms. The pooled incidence of PPP at 1-month follow-up in patients undergoing ablation, enucleation and TURP were 0.15 (95% CI 0.10-0.22), 0.09 (95% CI 0.04-0.19 and 0.10 (95% CI 0.06-0.15), respectively. PPP is no longer prevalent at 3-months and onwards post-operatively. Ablation is associated with a higher risk of PPP than enucleation (RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.04-4.62) and TURP (RR 2.40, 95% CI 1.03-5.62) in observational studies but not RCTs; and there were no significant differences in the rates of PPP upon comparison of other modalities.

CONCLUSION

PPP is common after transurethral benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery. Patients undergoing ablation had a higher rate of post-intervention PPP than those undergoing enucleation and TURP in observational studies.

Educational value of YouTube Surgical Videos of Thulium Laser Enucleation of The Prostate (ThuLEP): the quality assessment

Background

To assess the educational value of YouTube surgical videos of thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP).

Methods

A comprehensive search of “ThuLEP” or “thulium laser enucleation of the prostate” was performed on YouTube on October 31, 2020. According to the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS, we created a checklist to assess the educational value of these videos. The checklist included 20 options. Each option represented one point. The total score was the sum of all the points. The higher score represents the higher educational value.

Results

A total of 70 videos were included. The average number of views were 1,366 (range, 11–30,884). The mean video length was 16.59 mins (range, 1.20–70.35 mins). Only 22.9% (16/70) videos had audio or/and written commentary in English language. Although 67.4% (47/70) videos were present step by step, only 21.4% (15/70) videos did the detailed explanation of critical steps. The mean score of the videos was 5.5 points (range, 1–15). No videos met all the points of the checklist. The mean percentage conformity of the videos was 28% (range, 5–75%). The educational score of the videos had no significant positive correlation with the number of views.

Conclusions

The majority of ThuLEP videos on YouTube platform have low educational value. Videos often lack important and detailed explanations about surgical procedures. The ThuLEP learner should watch these videos selectively. These findings remind us that a global effort should be made to improve the educational value of YouTube surgical videos, and more reporting guidelines about urological endoscopic surgery are still needed.

Is thulium laser vapoenucleation of the prostate equally safe and effective in elderly patients? A propensity score matched analysis of early perioperative and functional outcomes

PURPOSE

To evaluate if thulium laser vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) is equally safe and effective in a selected cohort of elderly patients when compared to "younger" patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent ThuVEP between September 2018 and February 2020. After application of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, patients were stratified according to the 75 years-old cut-off point suggested by the WHO. Group A included patients < 75 years-old; Group B included patients > 75 years-old. Preoperative assessment included urological consultation, prostate specific antigen (PSA), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life index, transrectal ultrasound to estimate prostate volume (PVol), and uroflowmetry to assess preoperative Qmax, Qave and post-void residual volume (PVR). Perioperative and postoperative data were analyzed during 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

After propensity-score analysis, 51 versus 51 patients were 1:1 matched according to PVol, PSA, Qmax, IPSS and QoL. Patients were comparable at baseline excluding age (65 (IQR 59-70) versus 79 (IQR 77-82) years, Group A versus B, respectively, p-value < 0.001). No differences were found in terms of hemoglobin drop, complications rate, catheterization time and length of hospital stay. Group A (younger) patients had more significant improvement in 30-days absolute Qmax, Qave and ΔQmax. At 90-days follow-up, the differences between the groups disappeared. Within the 90-days follow-up, no significant differences were found in the readmission rate, with no need of reinterventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In our hands, even in elderly patients affected by BPH, ThuVEP appears to be a safe and effective treatment option.

Holmium Versus Thulium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

CONTEXT

Holmium (HoLEP) and thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) are the two methods most commonly applied for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate. It remains unclear which of the two is superior in terms of outcome and complications.

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative and functional outcomes between HoLEP and ThuLEP.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration and in line with the PRISMA criteria. A comprehensive database search including MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and CENTRAL was conducted according to the PICO criteria. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were considered. All review steps were conducted by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane tool for RCTs.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The search identified 556 studies, of which four were eligible for qualitative and quantitative analysis, reporting on a total of 579 patients with follow-up of up to 18 months. No significant differences in operating time, enucleation weight, catheterization time, or hospital stay were observed between ThuLEP and HoLEP. The decrease in hemoglobin was significantly lower for ThuLEP (mean difference -0.54 g/dl, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.93 to -0.15; p < 0.001), but with low certainty of evidence. Transient urinary incontinence was more common for HoLEP (odds ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.32-0.99; p = 0.045), again with low certainty of evidence. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed for other complications or for functional measures and symptom scores.

CONCLUSIONS

ThuLEP and HoLEP offer comparable improvement in symptoms and postoperative voiding parameters. Both procedures are safe and major complications are rare. ThuLEP showed minor advantages for blood loss and the incidence of transient incontinence. This should be interpreted with caution owing to the low certainty of evidence. Therefore, treatment choice should be based on surgeon expertise and local conditions.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed four clinical trials that compared holmium and thulium lasers for treatment to reduce the size of the prostate gland. Our review assessed outcomes and complications. We found that both laser techniques are safe and suitable for reducing symptoms due to an enlarged prostate. Blood loss and short-lasting urinary incontinence were slightly lower after thulium compared to holmium laser treatment.

Recent evidence for anatomic endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) in patients with benign prostatic obstruction on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy

INTRODUCTION

Due to demographic changes in today's society, the number of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is increasing. Similarly, the proportion of patients with cardiovascular risk factors undergoing antiplatelet (AP) or anticoagulation (AC) therapy is growing as well.

METHODS

This review discusses the current literature on various techniques used for anatomic endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) in patients on AC/AP therapy.

RESULTS

The large number of energy sources used for AEEP makes it difficult to compare them. Overall, fewer bleeding-associated complications arise in patients under AP compared to AC or bridging therapy with low molecular weight heparin. However, perioperatively both AP and AC therapy lead to a higher risk of bleeding complications compared to patients not taking anticoagulants.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature shows that AEEP is possible and efficacious in patients under AC/AP therapy, with only slight differences compared to patients not taking AC/AP drugs, on a short and long-term basis. Nevertheless, the sparse data, the retrospective nature of many studies and the inclusion of prostate sizes between 50 and 110 ml only, make it difficult to come to strong conclusions.

Economic Evaluation of 1470 nm Diode Laser Enucleation vs Bipolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate

Purpose: Large meta-analyses demonstrate the noninferiority of laser enucleation to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) with regard to long-term efficacy and reoperation rate. Although the 1470 nm diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) is superior in hemostasis and surgical visibility, its complexity and associated longer operative time limit its widespread usage. The objective of this study was to generate long-term cost estimates for bipolar TURP and DiLEP, taking into account perioperative and adverse event costs. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent DiLEP (n = 114; November 2016 to February 2020) or TURP (n = 194; January 2016 to December 2018). A decision analysis model was constructed to compare costs of the primary procedure and subsequent complications taking into account disposable costs, operating room time, length of stay, reoperation rates, and readmissions. Costs were estimated from internal data, published literature and Medicare procedure costs. Markov modeling was used to create cost projections up to 10 years. Results: DiLEP was associated with shorter length of stay and fewer total complications, but longer operative times and greater initial costs. Cost were recuperated at 8 years postoperatively. At 10 years postoperatively, DiLEP represented approximately $664 cost savings per patient over TURP. Conclusions: DiLEP is a cost-effective alternative to TURP for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia in the properly selected patient. DiLEP has greater initial costs due to longer operative times. Costs are recuperated by 10 years postoperatively due to higher rate of same-day discharges, and lower complication and reoperation rates, incurring a $664 cost savings per patient treated by DiLEP relative to TURP.

Holmium laser enucleation of prostate by using en-bloc and bladder neck preservation technique: technical consideration and influence on functional outcomes

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP) by using en-bloc and bladder neck preservation technique on benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and assess the influence of this procedure on urinary and sexual functional outcomes.

Methods

A total of 704 patients with BPH undergoing HoLEP were retrospectively analysed. Amongst them, 213 who met the sexual function assessment criteria were further assessed the influence of the technique on sexual functional outcomes.

Results

The mean operative time, resected prostate weight and mean estimated blood loss were 69.3±14.8 min, 53.4±17.6 g and 62.1±23.7 mL, respectively. The mean duration of catheterization after surgery and mean hospital stay were 2.1±1 and 5.4±3.6 days, respectively. The post-void residual volume, maximum urinary flow rate, international prostate symptom score and quality of life score were all significantly improved postoperation (P<0.05). Amongst the 213 patients with normal antegrade ejaculation before surgery, postoperative international index of erectile function scores slightly improved, although the difference was insignificant (P>0.05). The difference in the Erection Hardness Grading Scale before and after surgery was statistically insignificant (P>0.05). A total of 25 (11.7%) patients had retrograde ejaculation after surgery.

Conclusions

HoLEP by an en-bloc and bladder neck preservation technique can obtain good functional outcome with small injury and high efficiency, especially for patients who need to preserve normal sexual function and anterograde ejaculation.

Active Optical Fibers and Components for Fiber Lasers Emitting in the 2-μm Spectral Range

Laser sources emitting in the infrared range at around 2 µm are attracting great interest for a variety of applications like processing of transparent thermoplastic polymers in industry as well as plenty of applications in medicine, spectroscopy, gas sensing, nonlinear frequency conversion to the mid-infrared, to mention a few. Of late, fiber lasers compared to other kinds of lasers benefit from their all-fiber design, leading to a compact, robust, and well thermally manageable device. Particularly, thulium- and holmium-doped fiber lasers are the first choice in fiber lasers emitting light around 2 µm. In this paper, we give an overview of our recent results in the research on thulium- and holmium-doped optical fibers, fiber lasers, and related research topics in the 2-µm spectral range. In particular, we present, to our knowledge, the first results of improvement of pump absorption in double-clad fibers thanks to the fiber twist frozen during drawing. Finally, a brief demonstration of material processing by thulium all-fiber laser operating at 2 µm is presented.

[Surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) in patients under anticoagulation: a review of the bleeding risks of established techniques]

BACKGROUND

In an aging society an increase of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) requiring treatment is to be expected and the proportion of patients with cardiovascular comorbidities under anticoagulation is also increasing. As the operative treatment of BPO can be problematic, the hemostatic effect of the techniques is of particular importance.

OBJECTIVE

This review article discusses the data situation on the bleeding risk of established surgical techniques and the statement of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines "EAU guidelines on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), incl. benign prostatic obstruction (BPO)" on this topic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data analysis from PubMed.

RESULTS

The EAU guidelines favor transurethral laser vaporization of the prostate using "greenlight", thulium or diode laser and laser enucleation using a holmium or thulium laser in this patient collective. The bipolar is superior to monopolar transurethral resection (TUR-P) in hemostasis. In the future bipolar enucleation of the prostate (BipoLEP) can be an alternative under good hemostasis. Bleeding is a rare complication after recently established minimally invasive techniques, such as Urolift®, I‑TIND© and Rezum™, the same applies to prostate artery embolization. Aqua-ablation/AquaBeam® seems to be unsuitable due to frequent hematuria. Surgical adenomectomy can be associated with a high risk of bleeding.

CONCLUSION

According to current data, transurethral laser vaporization and enucleation of the prostate are the treatment of choice for patients under anticoagulation; however, other transurethral techniques, such as BipoLEP have an acceptable risk of bleeding and can be an alternative depending on local resources. Newer minimally invasive approaches could become more important in the future.