A step towards day case prostatectomy

Free-beam and contact laser soft-tissue ablation in urology

The ablation of tissue by laser has several applications in urology. Most of the published research has been concerned with the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Other applications studied include superficial upper- and lower-tract transitional-cell carcinoma, urethral and ureteral strictures, ureteropelvic junction stenosis, and posterior urethral valves. The attraction of laser ablation for the treatment of BPH lies with the decreased morbidity in comparison with standard transurethral electrocautery resection of the prostate and the ability to remove tissue immediately and therefore allow a more rapid progression to catheter removal and early voiding. The three main laser wavelengths used in urology for tissue ablation are the neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet when used with contact tips or high-density power settings, the potassium-titanyl-phosphate, and the holmium:YAG. This article reviews the published literature on the use of these laser wavelengths in soft-tissue ablation, focusing on the treatment of BPH.

Laser prostatectomy for benign prostatic obstruction

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction is a common problem for older men. The gold standard treatment, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), significantly improves urinary symptoms and urinary flow. However, TURP has up to a 20% morbidity. Currently, there are a number of minimally invasive procedures that may be safe, effective alternatives to TURP. One promising surgical technique is laser prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the therapeutic efficacy and safety of laser prostatectomy techniques for treating men with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomized controlled trials were identified from the Cochrane Collaboration Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, bibliographies of retrieved articles and reviews, and contacting expert relevant trialists and laser manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials evaluating laser prostatectomy treatment for men with symptomatic BPH. Trials were eligible if they (1) were randomized comparisons of a laser technique with TURP, (2) included at least 10 men with BPO in each treatment arm, (3) provided at least 6-months follow-up, and (4) included clinical outcomes such as urologic symptom scales or urodynamic measurements.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of methodologic quality was performed independently by two reviewers. Information on study design, subject and treatment characteristics, adverse events, urinary symptoms, and urinary flow were extracted using a standard form.

MAIN RESULTS

20 studies involving 1898 subjects were evaluated, including studies 4 with multiple comparisons. We found 8 comparisons of TURP with contact lasers, 8 with non-contact lasers, 4 with hybrid techniques, and one with interstitial laser coagulation (ILC). Two studies compared transurethral electrovaporization (TUVP) with contact lasers, one study compared interstitial laser coagulation with transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT), and one study compared holmium contact lasers (HoLRP) with open prostatectomy. Among the studies comparing laser prostatectomy with TURP, follow-up duration ranged from 6 to 36 months. Mean age (67.2 yrs), mean baseline symptom score (20.2), and mean baseline peak urinary flow (9.2 ml/s) did not differ by treatment group. The pooled percentage improvements for mean urinary symptoms ranged from 59% to 68% with lasers and 63% to 77% with TURP. The improvements for mean peak urinary flow ranged from 56% to 119% with lasers and 96% to 127% with TURP. Overall, laser subjects were less likely to receive transfusions or develop strictures and their hospitalizations were shorter. Non-contact laser subjects were more likely to have dysuria, urinary tract infection, and retention. Re-operation occurred more often following laser procedures.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Laser techniques are a useful alternative to TURP for treating BPO. Small sample sizes and differences in study design limit any definitive conclusions regarding the preferred type of laser technique. Data were insufficient to compare laser techniques with other minimally invasive procedures.

Laser prostatectomy versus transurethral resection for treating benign prostatic obstruction: a systematic review

PURPOSE

We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of laser prostatectomy techniques compared to transurethral resection of the prostate for symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane library and reference lists of retrieved studies to identify randomized trials of 6 months or greater in duration with at least 10 subjects in each treatment arm. We extracted data on study design, subject and treatment characteristics, adverse events, urinary symptoms and urinary flow.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies involving 1,488 subjects were evaluated, including 8 comparisons of transurethral resection with contact lasers, 7 with noncontact lasers and 4 with hybrid techniques. Study duration ranged from 6 to 36 months. Mean patient age (67.4 years), baseline symptom score (20.2) and peak urinary flow (9.5 ml. per second) did not differ by treatment group. Transurethral resection of the prostate provided slightly greater improvement in urinary symptoms and flow. The pooled mean percentage improvement for urinary symptoms ranged from 59% to 68% with lasers and 63% to 77% with transurethral resection. Improvement for peak urinary flow ranged from 56% to 119% with lasers and 96% to 127% with transurethral resection of the prostate. Laser procedures resulted in fewer transfusions (less than 1% versus 7%) and strictures (0% to 7% versus 8%), and required shorter hospitalizations. Reoperation occurred more often (RR = 5.7) following laser procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser techniques are a useful alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate for treating benign prostatic obstruction. Small sample sizes and differences in study design limit any definitive conclusions regarding the preferred type of laser technique.