Pulsed-wave vs Continuous-wave Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (ThuFLEP): A Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes

Holmium: YAG laser enucleation of the prostate using the new cyber Ho generator with magneto technology: does it provide any advantages compared to thulium: YAG prostate enucleation?

PURPOSE

To assess differences in efficacy and safety between Thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) and enucleation performed with the Holmium:YAG Cyber Ho laser generator (HoLEP) with Magneto technology (Quanta System®).

METHODS

Patients with surgical indication for benign prostatic hyperplasia underwent ThuLEP using Cyber TM generator (Group A) versus HoLEP using Cyber Ho generator with Magneto technology (Group B). In Group A settings were 100W for enucleation and 35W for coagulation. In Group B early apical detachment and coagulation were performed with energy 1 J and frequency 30 Hz by applying Magneto technology. Enucleation was performed with energy 2 J and frequency 40 Hz by applying Virtual Basket pulse modulation.

RESULTS

200 patients were enrolled (100 patients per group). Preoperative features were comparable. Mean prostate size was 78.9 vs. 80.5 ml in Group A vs. B (p = 0.09). Mean operative time was 70.6 vs. 64.3 min (p = 0.13) with mean enucleation time 48.8 vs. 43.7 min (p = 0.21) and morcellation time 21.2 vs. 14.6 min (p = 0.03) in ThuLEP vs. HoLEP group. Micturition improvements were comparable. Postoperative gross haematuria was significantly more frequent after ThuLEP and clots-induced urinary retention occurred in 5.0% of cases, compared to no cases after HoLEP (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

HoLEP using the Cyber Ho generator with the application of Magneto technology for coagulation seems to provide an haemostatic advantage compared to ThuLEP, suggested by the significantly shorter morcellation time, higher morcellation efficiency and lower rate of postoperative gross haematuria and clots-induced urinary retention. Functional outcomes are comparable.

Application trends and research hotspots of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a bibliometric and visualization analysis

PURPOSE

Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) is a preferred treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). This bibliometric analysis aims to analyze the application trends and research hotspots of EEP.

METHODS

We conducted a bibliometric analysis of publications indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection from 1989 to 2023. The techniques examined include holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP), thulium laser enucleation (ThuLEP/ThuFLEP), bipolar/monopolar transurethral enucleation (b-TUEP/m-TUEP), GreenLight laser enucleation (GreenLEP), and diode laser enucleation (DiLEP). We utilized VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and the R package 'bibliometrix' for the analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 739 English-language studies were analyzed, revealing a steady increase in EEP-related publications. HoLEP was the most extensively studied technique, followed by ThuLEP and b-TUEP, while ThuFLEP gaining emerging interest. There has been a notable lack of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for GreenLEP, DiLEP and m-TUEP. China, the United States, and Germany led in publication volume and collaboration networks. Key contributors in the field were identified, with recent research focusing on topics like postoperative transient urinary incontinence (TUI) and the role of robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) in comparison to EEP.

CONCLUSIONS

EEP is gaining widespread clinical acceptance for BPH treatment. Future research should focus on addressing the gap in high-quality RCTs, especially for underexplored techniques like GreenLEP, DiLEP and m-TUEP, and explore strategies to reduce postoperative TUI. Prospective comparisons between RASP and EEP will be crucial for optimizing surgical approaches in BPH management.

Ejaculation-sparing enucleation of the prostate with Thulium: Yag laser (ES-ThuLEP) versus Thulium Fiber laser (ES-ThuFLEP): outcomes on sexual function

PURPOSE

To compare the effect on sexual function of ejaculation-sparing enucleation of the prostate using Thulium: YAG laser (ES-ThuLEP) versus continuous-wave Thulium Fiber Laser (ES-ThuFLEP).

METHODS

112 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia who wished to preserve ejaculation were treated. 58 patients underwent ES-ThuLEP (Group A) using the Cyber TM generator. 54 patients underwent ES-ThuFLEP (Group B) using the Fiber Dust generator. Sexual function was evaluated through the International Index of Erectile Function 5 (IIEF-5) score, the four-item Male Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ-EjD), personal satisfaction and the occurrence of haemospermia and painful ejaculation 3 and 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 65.8 years in Group A and 66.7 years in Group B. Groups were comparable according to preoperative features. Mean preoperative IIEF-5 score was 18.8 in Group A and 17.9 in Group B (p = 0.14). In all cases an ejaculation-sparing procedure was performed sparing the tissue around the veru montanum and near the prostate apex. Three months after surgery mean IIEF-5 score was 19.3 in Group A and 18.0 in Group B (p = 0.12). Six months after surgery mean IIEF-5 score was 17.8 in Group A and 18.1 in Group B (p = 0.09). No significant differences were observed according to anterograde ejaculation (81.0% vs. 81.5%, p = 0.07), subjective satisfaction (72.4% vs. 74.1%, p = 0.10), painful ejaculation (10.3% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.14) and haemosparmia rate (12.1% vs. 14.8%, p = 0.08). Ejaculation and satisfaction rate were significantly higher with prostates ≥ 80 ml in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Ejaculation-sparing enucleation of the prostate effectively preserved sexual function in the majority of patients, with high rate of anterograde ejaculation and subjective satisfaction, low rates of painful ejaculation and haemospermia and no significant differences between Thulium: YAG and Thulium Fiber Laser. Preservation of ejaculation and personal satisfaction were significantly higher with prostates ≥ 80 ml compared to smaller ones.

Real-world experience with the new pulsed solid-state Thulium: YAG laser (Thulio) for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate

PURPOSE

The solid-state Thulium laser (Tm: YAG) is a novel alternative to the widely used Holmium laser for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) due to its relatively high peak power. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy and safety of a new pulsed Tm: YAG laser in its first application in humans.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected for the first 103 patients who underwent EEP with a new pulsed solid-state Tm: YAG laser (Thulio®, Dornier MedTech Systems GmbH, Weßling, Germany). Peri- and postoperative data were assessed. Procedure-specific complications were graded using Clavien-Dindo Classifications (CDC). Patients were interviewed 15 months after the surgery to evaluate functional and long-term outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS®).

RESULTS

The mean preoperative prostate volume was 105.6 ± 55.0 ml. Median enucleation speed was 4.1 g per minute (range 1.1-9.7). Short-term postoperative complications occurred in 21 patients (20.4%), but no high-grade complications (CDC ≥ IV) were observed. Five patients suffered gross haematuria and required reintervention (CDC IIIb; 4.9%). After 15 months, 76 patients (73.8%) participated in the follow-up interview, where seven patients (9.2%) reported complications, including two reinterventions for urethral strictures (CDC IIIb; 2.6%). Most patients reported an improvement in continence (54.0%) and urine stream (93.4%), but no difference in erectile function (81.6%). No persistent dysuria was reported. Patient satisfaction with the surgery results was very high (96.1%).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate with the new pulsed solid-state Tm: YAG laser is a safe and effective option for surgical BPH treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register number: DRKS00031676. Registration date: 10 May 2023, retrospectively registered.

Evaluation of the learning curve for Thulium fiber laser enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP): retrospective study of a single-surgeon experience in real-world settings

PURPOSE

To assess the learning curve of Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP) of a single surgeon inexperienced in laser endoscopic enucleation of prostate (EEP).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients with benign prostate hyperplasia undergoing ThuFLEP at our center between January 2022 and August 2023 by one surgeon. Inclusion criteria were International Prostate Symptom Score > 7, prostate volume < 200 g, and maximal urinary flow rate < 15 mL/s. The surgeon was inexperienced in laser EEP and trained by watching educational videos of ThuFLEP before starting to perform the procedure under mentoring during the first 4 cases. Procedural data (enucleation and morcellation efficiency, complications) and functional results up to 3 months were evaluated. Patients were divided into 4 cohorts of 20 consecutive cases to evaluate outcomes evolution throughout time.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 69.9 years (SD 7.8) and mean prostate volume was 89.9 g (SD 25.8). Preoperative functional parameters were comparable between the groups. Mean enucleation efficiency (EE) ratio and morcellation efficiency (ME) ratio reached respectively 0.78 g/min (SD 0.55) and 2.49 g/min (SD 1.03) and both variables significantly increased from group 1 to group 3 (p < 0,001). Perioperative complications remained low throughout the caseload with similar significant 3-month functional improvements between all groups.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to evaluate ThuFLEP learning curve for a single surgeon inexperienced in laser EEP with limited mentoring. Under these real-world conditions, nearly 60 cases were needed to complete the learning curve with a complications rate remaining low throughout the training process.

[Development of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate]

This article deals with lasers from their initial description to the most advanced applications in the treatment of benign prostate enlargement.

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.

Laser Technology Advancements in the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lasers have had a significant impact on the treatment of benign prostatic hypertrophy. This article attempts to distill the advancements in laser technology for the treatment of benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) into key and understandable points to help make this topic more accessible to urologists.

RECENT FINDINGS

The holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (YAG) laser, one of the most significant lasers in the field of urology, has recently been improved with pulse modulating technology (Moses™ technology). New thulium:YAG technology allows both pulsed and continuous wave modes. The thulium fiber laser is one of the newer lasers to come to market and has been shown to have effective and safe outcomes. GreenLight™ lasers are predominantly used in photovaporization procedures and have also been studied extensively, although less in recent years. The modern urologist is fortunate to have many high-quality lasers and a wide variety of surgical techniques to choose from when treating BPH. Understanding the basic laser principles and applications will help urologists to select the best treatment options for their patients with BPH.

Thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review of the current outcomes

INTRODUCTION

One recent addition to different lasers used for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is the thulium fiber laser (TFL). The purpose of this systematic review is to present the feasibility, safety and efficacy of TFL Enucleation of the Prostate (ThuFLEP).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed®, Scopus® and Cochrane® primary databases were systematically screened. The search strategy used the PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) criteria. Patients should be adults with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) undergoing ThuFLEP. While comparative studies reporting comparison of ThuFLEP to other BPO treatments were included, cohort studies with no comparison group were also accepted. Outcomes including enucleation time and complication rates were reported.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Twelve studies met all the predefined criteria and were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Mean operative time and enucleation time ranged from 46.6±10.2 to 104.5±33.6 and from 38.8±17.9 to 66.0±24.9 minutes, respectively. Most of the complications were Grade I or Grade II ones. Although TFL was found to present some advantages over older BPO treatments, its outcomes were comparable with other endoscopic enucleation approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

ThuFLEP seems to be a feasible, safe and efficient approach for BPO symptoms management. Limited evidence showed that although ThuFLEP was associated with a reduced total operative time, it was also associated with worse IPSS improvement at 1-year follow-up, when compared with MOSESTM Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP). These findings confirm the well-established opinion that the enucleation technique itself is more important than the technology which is used.

Experts' recommendations in laser use for the endoscopic treatment of prostate hypertrophy: a comprehensive guide by the European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Training-Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (T.R.U.S.T.)-Group

PURPOSE

To identify expert laser settings for BPH treatment and evaluate the application of preventive measures to reduce complications.

METHODS

A survey was conducted after narrative literature research to identify relevant questions regarding laser use for BPH treatment (59 questions). Experts were asked for laser settings during specific clinical scenarios. Settings were compared for the reported laser types, and common settings and preventive measures were identified.

RESULTS

Twenty-two experts completed the survey with a mean filling time of 12.9 min. Ho:YAG, Thulium fiber laser (TFL), continuous wave (cw) Tm:YAG, pulsed Tm:YAG and Greenlight™ lasers are used by 73% (16/22), 50% (11/22), 23% (5/22), 13.6% (3/22) and 9.1% (2/22) of experts, respectively. All experts use anatomical enucleation of the prostate (EEP), preferentially in one- or two-lobe technique. Laser settings differ significantly between laser types, with median laser power for apical/main gland EEP of 75/94 W, 60/60 W, 100/100 W, 100/100 W, and 80/80 W for Ho:YAG, TFL, cwTm:YAG, pulsed Tm:YAG and Greenlight™ lasers, respectively (p = 0.02 and p = 0.005). However, power settings within the same laser source are similar. Pulse shapes for main gland EEP significantly differ between lasers with long and pulse shape modified (e.g., Moses, Virtual Basket) modes preferred for Ho:YAG and short pulse modes for TFL (p = 0.031).

CONCLUSION

Ho:YAG lasers no longer seem to be the mainstay of EEP. TFL lasers are generally used in pulsed mode though clinical applicability for quasi-continuous settings has recently been demonstrated. One and two-lobe techniques are beneficial regarding operative time and are used by most experts.