Cost analysis of Greenlight photoselective vaporization of the prostate compared to transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia

Trends in day-case bladder outflow obstruction surgery: a study using Hospital Episode Statistics

OBJECTIVES

To describe the contemporary evolution of day-case bladder outflow obstruction (BOO) surgery in England and to profile day-case BOO surgery practices across England in terms of the types of operation performed and their safety profiles.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective observational analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics and UK Office for National Statistics data. All 111 043 recorded operations across 117 hospital trusts over 66 months, from 1 January 2017 to 30 June 2022, were obtained. Operations were identified as one of: transurethral resection of prostate (TURP); laser ablation or enucleation; vapour therapy; prostatic urethral lift (PUL); or bladder neck incision. Monthly day-case rate trends were plotted across the study period. Descriptive data, day-case rates and 30-day hospital readmissions were analysed for each operation type. Multilevel regression modelling with mixed effects was performed to determine whether day-case surgery was associated with higher 30-day hospital readmissions.

RESULTS

Day-case patients were younger, with fewer comorbidities. Time series analysis showed a linear day-case rate increase from 8.3% (January 2017) to 21.0% (June 2022). Day-case rates improved for 92/117 trusts in 2021/2022 compared with 2017. Three of the six trusts with the highest day-case rates performed predominantly day-case TURP, and the other three laser surgery. Nationally, PUL and vapour surgery had the highest day-case rates (80.9% and 38.1%). Most inpatient operations were TURP. Multilevel regression modelling found reduced odds of 30-day readmission after day-case BOO surgery (all operations pooled), no difference for day-case vs inpatient TURP, and reduced odds following day-case LASER operations.

CONCLUSIONS

The day-case rates for BOO surgery have linearly increased. Minimally invasive surgical technologies are commonly performed as day cases, whereas high day-case rates for TURP and for laser ablation operations are seen in a minority of hospitals. Day-case pathways to treat BOO can be safely developed irrespective of operative modality.

Cost-utility of minimally invasive therapies vs. pharmacotherapy as initial therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia A Canadian healthcare payer perspective

INTRODUCTION

Recently, minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST s) have become an alternative to surgery or pharmacotherapy to manage benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH ). This study evaluated the cost-utility of water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT ) and prostatic urethral lift (PUL) compared to pharmacotherapy as initial treatment for patients with moderate-to-severe BPH.

METHODS

In this model-based economic evaluation, we simulated BPH progression in men (mean age 65 years, average International Prostate Symptom Score 16.6) over their lifetime and estimated healthcare costs (from the Canadian healthcare payer perspective) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), discounted at 1.5% annually. In the model, men could receive up to three lines of therapy: 1) initial pharmacotherapy with MIST as second-line, and TURP or pharmacotherapy as third-line; 2) initial MIST (WVTT or PUL) with MIST again, TURP, or pharmacotherapy as second-line, and TURP as third-line. The model was populated using data from the published literature.

RESULTS

The expected lifetime QALYs and costs were 15.50 QALYs and $14 626 for initial treatment with WVTT, 15.35 QALYs and $11 795 for pharmacotherapy followed by WVTT, 15.29 QALYs and $13 582 for pharmacotherapy followed by PUL, and 15.29 QALYs and $19 151 for initial treatment with PUL. Strategies involving PUL procedures were dominated by strategies involving WVTT. The incremental cost per QALY gained was $18 873 for initial WVTT compared to initial pharmacotherapy followed by WVTT.

CONCLUSIONS

WVTT appears to be a cost-effective procedure and may be an appropriate first-line alternative to pharmacotherapy for patients with BPH and prostate volume less than 80 cm3 who seek faster improvement and no lifelong commitment to daily medications.

Functional outcomes of GreenLight 180-W photoselective vaporization in patients with large (≥ 80 cc) prostates: an analysis of over 3000 men in the Global Greenlight Group (GGG) database

INTRODUCTION

GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) has gained widespread adoption as an option to traditional transurethral resection of the prostate. Prior reports expressed concern with the use of PVP in large prostates. The aim of this study was to investigate the adjusted outcomes of GreenLight PVP in men with large (≥ 80 cc) vs. small prostates (< 80 cc).

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Global Greenlight Group which pools data from 7 high volume centers. Men with established benign prostatic hyperplasia who underwent GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180 W system between 2011 and 2019 were eligible and assigned into two groups based on their prostate size (≥ 80 and < 80 cc). 11 functional and perioperative covariates were collected. Analyses were adjusted for patient age and presence of median lobe.

RESULTS

3426 men met the inclusion criteria. 34.6% (n = 1187) of patients had a large prostate size. Baseline age and prostate volume were significantly different between the groups. The magnitude of absolute improvement in unadjusted international prostate symptom score was significantly greater in the large (≥ 80 cc) prostate group at 12 months, with an absolute change of 19.17 points (95% CI 18.46-19.88; p < 0.01). There was also a significant drop in PVR at both 6- (p = 0.007) and 12 months (p = 0.005). There were no significant differences in transfusion (p = 0.42), hematuria (p = 0.80), or 30-day readmission rates (p = 0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Greenlight PVP is a safe and effective alternative for patients with prostate sizes ≥ 80 cc, with durable outcomes relatively independent from prostate size.

Surgical treatment options for benign prostatic obstruction: beyond prostate volume

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Many surgical treatment options are available for patients who present with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). This article reviews the current treatment options available and distinguishes them based on five clinical considerations: antithrombotic therapy, sexual function preservation, ambulatory procedures, anesthesia-related risks and duration of catheterization.

RECENT FINDINGS

A comprehensive review of the literature was performed on 10 BPO procedures. Laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP), bipolar plasma transurethral vaporization of the prostate and photoselective vaporization (PVP) of the prostate reduces the risk of bleeding, which is recommended for anticoagulated men. Ejaculatory function is more likely to be preserved following transurethral incision of the prostate, Rezūm, Aquablation, UroLift and iTind. Same-day discharge is possible for LEP, PVP and prostatic arterial embolization (PAE). For patients with high anesthesia-related risks, procedures compatible with local anesthesia (UroLift, Rezūm, iTind and PAE) should be favored. Catheterization duration is shorter with UroLift, PVP and LEP.

SUMMARY

BPO treatment options are growing rapidly. The optimal procedure for a given patient is based on factors such as associated risks, recovery and expected outcomes. Besides prostate volume, the clinical considerations in the present article can help elucidate the best surgical BPO treatment option for each patient based on their values, preferences, and risk tolerance.

Reasons to believe in vaporization: a review of the benefits of photo-selective and transurethral vaporization

PURPOSE

In the current review, we will discuss the state of the literature of vaporization of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement (BPE). We discuss two methods of vaporization of the prostate: Transurethral Vaporization of the Prostate (TUVP) and Greenlight Photo-selective Vaporization of the Prostate (PVP).

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the literature was performed on TUVP and PVP. The literature on transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) was also extensively reviewed as a comparative surgical method.

RESULTS

The evidence shows that TUVP appears to be the safer choice, as compared to TURP due to less intra- and peri-operative complications. PVP was associated with less bleeding complications than TURP with outpatient discharge. Importantly, PVP was not associated with serious bleeding events requiring blood transfusions or medical treatment in patients under anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapies. PVP was also shown to be a cost-effective option compared to TURP.

CONCLUSION

Prostate vaporization for the treatment of BPE appears to be an efficient and safer alternative to TURP. Vaporization techniques, particularly Greenlight PVP, should be offered to most men, especially those under anticoagulation therapy, as well as patients at risk of bleeding complications.

Transperineal intraprostatic injection of botulinum neurotoxin A vs transurethral resection of prostate for management of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostate hyperplasia: A prospective randomised study

Objectives: To evaluate transperineal intraprostatic injection of botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) who failed to respond to 6-month medical treatment compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

Patients and methods: In all, 92 men were divided into TURP and BoNT-A groups after being evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function, estimation of serum total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), ultrasonographic estimation of prostatic volume (PV), and uroflowmetry determination of voiding volume (VV), maximum urinary flow rate (Q_max) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR). BoNT-A (200 U diluted in 3 mL saline) was injected, using a 22-G spinal needle under transrectal ultrasonography guidance, with 1-mL in each lobe. Patients were assessed 3-monthly for 12 months.

Results: The IPSS significantly decreased in all patients with a non-significant difference between the groups. The mean VV and Q_max increased, whilst PVR, PV and serum tPSA significantly decreased. Patients who showed deterioration at 12 months were re-evaluated and underwent TURP. BoNT-A injection significantly maintained erectile function compared with TURP.

Conclusion: Intraprostatic BoNT-A injection reduced PV with subsequent increases in VV and Q_max, and decreases in PVR and serum tPSA level. Intraprostatic BoNT-A injection allowed surgery sparing in >70% and preserved erectile function in 91.3% of patients.

Abbreviations: BoNT-A: botulinum neurotoxin A; HRQOL: health-related quality of life; IIEF-5: five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function; PV: prostatic volume; PVR: post-void residual urine volume; Q_max: maximum urinary flow rate; tPSA: total PSA; VV: voided volume

Epidemiology and treatment modalities for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common conditions affecting men. BPH can lead to a number of symptoms for patients commonly referred to as lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Over the last decade, increased modifiable risk factors, such as metabolic disease and obesity, have resulted in an increased incidence of BPH. This increasing incidence has brought about a multitude of treatment modalities in the last two decades. With so many treatment modalities available, physicians are tasked with selecting the optimal therapy for their patients. Current therapies can first be divided into medical or surgical intervention. Medical therapy for BPH includes 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors and alpha-blockers, or a combination of both. Surgical interventions include a conventional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), as well as newer modalities such as bipolar TURP, holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), Greenlight and thulium laser, and prostatic urethral lift (PUL). Emerging therapies in this field must also be further investigated for safety and efficacy. This narrative review attempts to consolidate current and emerging treatment options for BPH and highlights the need for additional investigation on optimizing treatment selection.

Population-based assessment of re-treatment and healthcare utilisation after photoselective vaporisation of the prostate or electrosurgical transurethral resection of the prostate

OBJECTIVE

To compare the healthcare utilisation and repeat surgical treatment rate amongst older men undergoing an electrosurgical-transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) vs photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP), as the real-world implementation and outcomes of laser-based treatment have not been well studied.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used administrative data from the province of Ontario, Canada, to identify all men aged >66 years who underwent their first electrosurgical-TURP/PVP between 2003 and 2016. Our primary exposure was type of procedure (PVP or electrosurgical-TURP). Our primary outcome was need for repeat surgical treatment. The primary analysis was an adjusted marginal Cox model approach, which accounted for clustering of patients within surgeons; adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) or odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported.

RESULTS

We identified 52 748 men: 6838 (13%) underwent PVP, and 45 910 (87%) underwent electrosurgical-TURP. The median age was similar, and PVP became more common with time. Compared to the PVP group, more patients in the electrosurgical-TURP group had prior gross haematuria or urinary retention, and fewer had used anticoagulants, α-blockers, or 5α-reductase inhibitors. The need for repeat surgical treatment was significantly higher amongst men who had PVP (aHR 1.57, 95% CI 1.38-1.78; absolute risk difference +2.3%). PVP was also associated with a slightly higher risk of return to the emergency room within 30 days (aOR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.22) and a significantly lower risk of blood transfusion (aOR 0.24, CI 0.16-0.37); the majority of PVP cases were done with a <24 h stay (73%) vs electrosurgical-TURP (7%).

CONCLUSIONS

While some of the expected benefits of PVP (such as reduced transfusion risk and shorter length of stay) were observed, the significantly higher rate of repeat surgical treatment compared to electrosurgical-TURP may represent an important difference in implementation of this technology outside of clinical trials.

Cost Comparison of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment Options

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an economic context within which to consider treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). To this end, this review provides a comparison of the costs of combination medical therapy, operative treatment, and office-based therapies for BPH from a payer perspective.

RECENT FINDINGS

Analysis of Medicare charges from the authors' institution, as well as local retail costs of medication, demonstrated a wide range in costs of commonly used BPH treatments. In this study, interventions for BPH reached cost equivalence with combination medical therapy within 6 months to 8 years. A myriad of options for managing men with symptomatic BPH exist. It is prudent not only to consider surgeon preference and patient-specific factors when selecting a treatment but also to understand the economic impact different BPH therapies confer.