Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate vs. transurethral resection. Results of a multicentric, randomized clinical study on 150 patients

Comparison of effectiveness and postoperative complications of different surgical methods in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

Background

More and more new surgical procedures for the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) are proposed creatively. However, the existing clinical evidence shows that the effectiveness and safety of various procedures exist inconsistent.

Methods

The randomized controlled trials comparing the international prostate score, length of hospital stay, maximum urinary flow rate, operation time, and complication rates of prostatic artery embolization (PAE), Greenlight-XPS Laser prostate vaporization procedure (GLL PVP), diode laser enucleation of prostate (DILEP) and plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP), transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients with BPH were screened out in databases. The primary outcome was pooled using a restricted maximum likelihood-based random-effect model and inverse variance-based fixed-effect model. Cochrane Q statistics and I2 statistics were computed to quantify between-study heterogeneity. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool.

Results

This meta-analysis ultimately included 14 original research papers, with 1,940 participants enrolled. Eight studies were considered to be at moderate risk of bias, while the others were at mild risk of bias. Although the improvement in functional outcome of the DILEP procedure was equivalent to that of the PKRP procedure, the DILEP procedure group had fewer hospital stays than the PKRP group (P=0.01). In addition, even though the performance of the GLL PVP procedure in the improvement of functional outcome was inferior to the counterpart of TURP (P=0.64), it had a much fewer hospital stays (P=0.01). Moreover, there is still insufficient evidence for the improvement of subjective functional indicators of postoperative patients with PAE compared with TURP [international prostate symptom score (IPSS): P=0.73; IPSS QoL: P=0.91], but achieved less satisfactory objective functional outcomes (Qmax: P=0.06; PVR: P=0.00).

Discussion

New surgical procedures such as GLL PVP, PAE, and DILEP were safer than traditional TURP procedures. However, it is not superior to traditional surgery in the improvement of clinical symptoms. In clinical practice, the pros and cons of the new operation and the traditional operation should be carefully weighed, and the operation that is most suitable for the patient's condition should be selected.

Correlation between transurethral interventions and their influence on type and duration of postoperative urinary incontinence: results from a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

Objective To perform a systematic review to assess the incidence of transient (<6-month) and persistent (>6-month) stress (SUI), urge (UUI), and mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) after transurethral surgeries for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Materials and Methods A systematic literature search was performed using Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science. We included studies comparing monopolar(M)/bipolar(B) TURP vs ablation vs enucleation procedures. Incidence of incontinence was assessed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Method and reported as odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI), and p-values. Statistical significance was set at p <0.05 Evidence synthesis 28 studies were included. Incidence of transient SUI was 4.6%, 6.0%, 3.0%, 2.4% after ablation, enucleation, M-TURP, and B-TURP, respectively. Incidence of persistent SUI was 1.1% after ablation, 1.7%, after enucleation and M-TURP, 1.0% after B-TURP. Incidence of transient UUI was 2.0%, 7.3%, 4.4%, 2.8% after ablation, enucleation, M-TURP, and B-TURP, respectively. Incidence of persistent UUI was 2.2% after M-TURP. The incidence of transient MUI was 5.1%, 0.8%, 5.4%, 0.9% after ablation, enucleation, M-TURP, and B-TURP, respectively. Incidence of persistent MUI was 3.1% after ablation, and 4.8% after M-TURP. Incidence of transient and persistent SUI and UUI did not differ after TURP vs enucleation. Incidence of transient (OR 3.32, 95% CI 0.41-26.65, p=0.26) and persistent SUI (OR 4.79, 95%CI 0.52-43.89,p=0.17) was not significantly higher after ablation. Incidence of transient UUI was not significantly higher after ablation (OR 2.62, 95%CI 0.04-166.01,p=0.65), whilst persistent UUI did not differ. Incidence of transient MUI was significantly higher after enucleation (OR 3.26, 95%CI 1.51-7.05,p=0.003). Incidence of transient and persistent MUI did not differ after TURP vs ablation. Conclusions Ablation, enucleation, and TURP have an impact on all forms of incontinence but this is transient in most cases with no difference between the groups, except for MUI which was higher after enucleation vs M-TURP.

Bladder neck stenosis after transurethral prostate surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Bladder neck stenosis (BNS) is a long-term complication of surgical procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). We performed a systematic literature review and a meta-analysis of the incidence of BNS after transurethral procedures for BPH.

METHODS

We performed a systemic literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Controlled Register of Trials. We accepted only randomized trials comparing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) vs. other transurethral surgery for BPH that were grouped in Ablation vs. Enucleation modalities. The incidences of BNS were pooled using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Method with the random effect model and expressed as Risk Ratios, 95% Confidence Intervals, and p values. Study heterogeneity was assessed utilizing the I² value.

RESULTS

72 studies were identified for meta-analysis, 46 comparing TURP vs. Ablation and 26 TURP vs. Enucleation. The pooled incidence of BNS was 1.3% after TURP, 0.66% after enucleation and 1.2% after Ablation. The incidence of BNS was higher after TURP than after Enucleation but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.75 95% CI 0.81-3.79, p = 0.16). There was no significant heterogeneity among the studies (I² 0%, Chi² 4.11, p = 0.90). The incidence of BNS was higher after TURP than after Ablation, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.82-2.11, p = 0.26) with no significant heterogeneity (I² 0%, Chi² 21.1, p = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed no difference in the rate of BNS incidence among randomized trials comparing TURP vs. Ablation vs. Enucleation and can be used as a reference to counsel patients undergoing BPH surgery.

Endoscopic enucleation vs endoscopic vaporization procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia: how should we choose: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of different endoscopic procedures of the prostate techniques, by comparing endoscopic enucleation (EEP) and endoscopic vaporization procedures (EVP) of the prostate; and laser enucleation procedures (L-EEP) vs laser vaporization procedures (L-EVP) surgeries for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed in December 2019 using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies. Two analyses were carried out: (1) EEP vs EVP; and (2) L-EEP vs L-EVP. Efficacy and safety were evaluated using perioperative data, functional outcomes, including maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), quality of life (QoL), international prostate symptom score (IPSS), postvoiding residual urine volume (PRV), and rate of complications. Meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan5.3.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies (4907 patients) evaluated EEP vs EVP, and 12 of them (4392 patients) evaluated L-EEP vs L-EVP. EEP showed improved functional outcomes compared with EVP. EEP was always presented a better Qmax at various follow-up times. EEP also associated with a reduced PRV and IPSS at 12 months postsurgery, an increased Qmax, and reduced IPSS and QoL score at both 24 and 36 months postsurgery. In addition, EEP was associated with less total energy utilized and retreatment for residual adenoma, but a longer catheterization time. Among other outcomes, there was no significant difference. L-EEP favors total energy used, retreatment for residual adenoma, and functional outcomes. L-EEP was associated with reduced PRV at 1, 6, and 12 months postsurgery, a greater Qmax at 6 and 12 months postsurgery, a lower IPSS at 12 months postsurgery, and higher Qmax and lower IPSS and QoL scores at 24 and 36 months postsurgery. However, there was no difference at 3 months postsurgery. No significant differences were observed for other perioperative data and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Both EEP and EVP displayed sufficient efficacy and safety for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia. EEP and L-EEP were favored in perioperative data, rate of complications, and functional outcomes. However, the clinical significance of those statistical differences was unclear. Hence, higher-quality randomized controlled trials may be needed to provide a clear algorithm.

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.

Transurethral procedures in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness and complications

BACKGROUND

With the progress of surgical techniques and instruments, various minimally invasive surgical therapies were developed to treat benign prostatic hyperplasisa (BPH). However, the efficacy and safety of different transurethral procedures for the treatment of BPH are still undefined.

METHOD

A systematic search was performed for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which compared the transurethral procedures for BPH from 1995 to 2016. The clinical baseline characteristics, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), postvoid residual (PVR), maximum flow rate (Qmax), short-term and long-term complications were analyzed using RevMan and ADDIS software.

RESULT

Eighty-eight randomly controlled trials and fifteen procedures were included in the network meta-analysis. HoLEP greatly inproved PVR. TmLRP had the best efficacy in improving QoL score. Diode laser vaporization of prostate was superior in improving IPSS and Qmax. Diode laser through vaporization required the shortest time in catheterization, while Nd:YAG was the longest procedure. For the hospitalization time, TUR was the longest and HoLEP was the shortest. TmLRP was related to the lowest postoperative hemoglobin decrease. TmLEP had the least rates of occurrence of hematuria, reoperation and erectile dysfunction. HoLEP was the best choice to reduce the incidence of recatheterization, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, stress urinary incontinence and retrograde ejaculation. The complications such as blood transfusion, urethral stricture, bladder neck contracture were relatively rare in the patients who underwent diode laser vaporization of prostate.

CONCLUSION

Compared with other transurethral procedures, thulium, holmium and diode lasers were associated with better efficacy and fewer complications.

[S2e guideline of the German urologists: Instrumental treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia]

This report summarizes the relevant aspects of the S2e guideline of the German Urologists for the instrumental treatment of the lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Recommendations are given regarding open and transurethral procedures (TUR-P, bipolar TUR-P, TUI-P, HE-TUMT, TUNA, and the different Laser techniques). Recommendations are also given concerning intraprostatic stents and injection therapies. The influence of the different therapeutic options on bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) is described in detail.

Bipolar transurethral vaporization: a superior procedure in benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective randomized comparison with bipolar TURP

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate (TUVP) with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a prospective randomized trial, 88 patients with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) underwent bipolar TUVP (N = 39) or bipolar TURP (N = 49) from October 2010 to November 2011. The inclusion criteria were age > 50 years, prostate volume of 30-80 mL, serum PSA < 4 ng/mL, IPSS ≥ 20, Qmax ≤ 10 mL/s and failed medical therapy. The perioperative and postoperative outcomes were evaluated and the IPSS and Qmax were assessed preoperatively and 3 months after procedure in all cases.

RESULTS

Both groups were similar in patient age, prostate volume, preoperative IPSS and Qmax. The TUVP group had significantly lower mean values of operative time, hospital stay, catheterization period, irrigation fluid volume and serum hemoglobin, creatinine, sodium and potassium changes compared with TURP group. No significant differences were seen between two groups regarding complications (TUVP = 10.3%; TURP = 12.2%) and modified Clavien classification of complications. No TUR syndrome, obturator reflex or epididymitis occurred in both groups. Re-hospitalization and transfusion due to clot retention (N = 2) and urethral stricture (N = 1) were reported only in the TURP group. Three patients experienced urinary retention after catheter removal in the TUVP group. Two patients were re-catheterized temporarily and one patient required repeat bipolar TUVP. Three months after surgery, two groups had significant improvement in IPSS and Qmax. But the TUVP group had significantly lower IPSS and higher Qmax than TURP group.

CONCLUSIONS

Bipolar TUVP is a safe, effective and low cost procedure among minimally invasive surgeries of BPH. Compared with bipolar TURP, the bipolar TUVP had similar complications, better perioperative and postoperative outcomes, superior hemostasis and higher efficacy.

Prostate laser vaporization is safe and effective in elderly men

Introduction:

There are few data on the safety and efficacy of laser photoselective vaporization (LVP) in elderly men. We compared the safety and efficacy of LVP for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in men ≥75 years, who we defined as elderly, to those <75 years.

Materials and Methods:

Safety and efficacy outcomes in elderly men undergoing LVP for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to BPH from 2005 to 2012 were compared with men <75 years. Differences between-groups in demographics, perioperative outcomes, complications, and postoperative changes in International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS) were calculated.

Results:

Of 202 patients, 49 (24%) were elderly (range: 75-95 years) and 153 (76%) were <75 years. Preoperatively, elderly men were more likely to have heart disease (35% vs. 20%, P = 0.03), gross hematuria (6.1% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.05), urinary retention (57% vs. 41%, P = 0.07), and take anti-coagulants (61% vs. 35%, P = 0.002). Elderly men had a longer median length of stay (1 day vs. 0 day, P = 0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in transfusion frequency (4.4% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.14) or Clavien III complications (2% vs. 2.6%, P = 1.0). One month postsurgery, elderly patients reported smaller median decreases in I-PSS (5.5 vs. 9, P = 0.02) and urinary bother (1 point vs. 2, P = 0.03) compared with preoperative values. At till 9 months follow-up, there were no significant between-group differences in median I-PSS or urinary bother scores.

Conclusions:

Despite a higher prevalence of preoperative comorbidity and urinary retention, elderly LVP patients experienced perioperative safety and shorter term efficacy outcomes comparable to younger men.

Vaporization techniques for benign prostatic obstruction: GreenLight all the way?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To give an overview and discuss the recent literature of different vaporization techniques of the prostate using laser energy or high-frequency current.

RECENT FINDINGS

Ten studies covering GreenLight vaporization of the prostate with its evolution from 80 W KTP to 120 W HPS to 180 W XPS system were identified. Only one study had a randomized design comparing HPS to transurethral resection of the prostate. The diode laser is discussed with its results after recent modification with quartz head fiber. Although complication rates are low, the comparison to transurethral resection of the prostate is lacking. Current data on established vapoenucleation and promising vaporesection of thulium:YAG lasers are presented. Further, recent studies on plasmakinetic vaporization are discussed.

SUMMARY

At present, high evidence data on vaporization techniques of the prostate are lacking. The data on GreenLight vaporization of the prostate are the most convincing.

Pure bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate: the Zürich experience

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Bipolar plasma vaporization (BPV) has been introduced as an alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Promising short-term results, but inferior mid-term results compared to TURP have been reported following first-generation bipolar electrovaporization. Outcome data following second-generation BPV are still scarce. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the intra- and postoperative outcomes of contemporary BPV in a center with long-standing expertise on laser vaporization of the prostate.

METHODS

A consecutive series of 83 patients undergoing BPV in a tertiary referral center was prospectively evaluated. The investigated outcome parameters included the maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual volume, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS)/quality of life (Qol), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests. Follow-up investigations took place after 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare pre- and post-treatment parameters.

RESULTS

The median (range) preoperative prostate volume was 41 mL (17-111 mL). The preoperative IPSS, Qol, Qmax, and residual volume were 16 (2-35), 4 (0-6), 10.1 mL/s (3-29.3 mL/s), and 87 mL (0-1000 mL), respectively. One third of the patients were undergoing platelet aggregation inhibition (PAI). No intraoperative complications occurred. Postoperatively, 13 patients (15.7%) had to be recatheterized. Three patients (3.6%) had clot retention and 28 patients (34%) reported any grade of dysuria. After 6 weeks, all outcome parameters improved significantly and remained improved over the 12-month observation period [IPSS: 3 (0-2); Qol: 1 (0-4); Qmax: 17.2 mL/s (3.2-56 mL/s); residual volume 11 mL (0-190 mL)]. The PSA reduction was 60% at study conclusion. Three patients (3.6%) developed a urethral stricture and four patients (4.8%) bladder neck sclerosis. Re-resections were not necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary BPV is a safe and efficacious treatment option even for patients undergoing PAI. Early urinary retention and temporary dysuria seem to be specific side effects of the treatment. Bleeding complications are rare. Long-term follow-up is needed to confirm these promising short-term results.

Evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms related to uncomplicated benign prostatic hyperplasia in Italy: updated summary from AURO.it

BACKGROUND

The first Italian national guidelines were developed by the Italian Association of Urologists and published in 2007. Since then, a number of new drugs or classes of drugs have emerged for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), new data have emerged on medical therapy (monotherapies and combination therapies), new surgical techniques have come into practice, and our understanding of disease pathogenesis has increased. Consequently, a new update of the guidelines has become necessary.

METHODS

A structured literature review was conducted to identify relevant papers published between 1 August 2006 and 12 December 2010. Publications before or after this timeframe were considered only if they were recognised as important milestones in the field or if the literature search did not identify publications within this timeframe. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were determined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.

MAIN FINDINGS

Decisions on therapeutic intervention should be based on the impact of symptoms on quality of life (QoL) rather than the severity of symptoms (International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) score). A threshold for intervention was therefore based on the IPSS Q8, with intervention recommended for patients with a score of at least 4. Several differences in clinical recommendations have emerged. For example, combination therapy with a 5α-reductase inhibitor plus α blocker is now the recommended option for the treatment of patients at risk of BPH progression. Other differences include the warning of potential worsening of cognitive disturbances with use of anticholinergics in older patients, the distinction between Serenoa repens preparations (according to the method of extraction), and the clearly defined threshold of prostate size for performing open surgery (>80 g). While the recommendations included in these guidelines are evidence based, clinical decisions should also be informed by patients' clinical and physical circumstances, as well as patients' preferences and actions.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines are intended to assist physicians and patients in the decision-making process regarding the management of LUTS/BPH, and support the process of continuous improvement of the quality of care and services to patients.

Prostate laser vaporization in men with urinary retention

OBJECTIVE

• To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laser vaporization of the prostate (LVP) with several different wavelengths for urinary retention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• A cohort study of patients undergoing LVP from 2005 to 2009 at a single institution was performed. • Outcomes were compared in those patients with urinary retention versus those without, using t-tests, Mann-Whitney U-test, chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test as appropriate.

RESULTS

• During the study period, 122 patients underwent LVP, of which 39 (32%) presented with refractory urinary retention requiring indwelling or intermittent catheterization. • The mean ± SD period of postoperative follow-up was 11.2 ± 9.6 months. Comparing patients with and without urinary retention, there were no significant preoperative differences in median body mass index (25.6 versus 26.4 kg/m(2) ; P= 0.40) or prostate-specific antigen (2.3 versus 2 ng/mL; P= 0.27). • Patients with urinary retention were significantly more likely to be diabetic (33% versus 12%; P= 0.01), have heart disease (36% versus 15%; P= 0.01) and be taking anticoagulants (61% versus 31%; P= 0.003). • Following LVP, retention patients were more likely than non-retention patients to fail an initial voiding trial (28.2% versus 7.2%; P= 0.002). • In total, 36 of 39 (92%) retention patients no longer required catheterization after postoperative recovery. No patients required perioperative transfusion. • Compared to those without preoperative retention, retention patients had a longer median duration of postoperative catheterization (3 versus 1 days; P= 0.01). • There were similar rates of low- and high-grade complications (P= 0.275 and 1.000, respectively) and no significant difference in median hospital stay (1 versus 0 days; P= 0.212).

CONCLUSIONS

• In the present study cohort, LVP was an effective and safe therapy for urinary retention. • Compared to patients without retention, those with retention had a higher prevalence of heart disease, diabetes and anticoagulant use. • Because the morbidity of LVP is low, and the prevalence of co-morbid disease high, LVP should be considered for the surgical management of refractory urinary retention.

Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate ‐ technical modifications and early clinical experience

The purpose of the study was to update the current modifications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) using bipolar high frequency current and to report on our first own clinical experience. Based on a Medline search covering the period from January 2000 to September 2006 and our clinical experience with three different devices (VISTA-ACMI, Gyrus, Storz), the technical basis of these modifications was described. In addition, an analysis of the actual outcome (handling, complications, morbidity) of bipolar TURP (n = 124) compared to a parallel series of monopolar TURP (N = 148) was carried out. Recently, five different modifications of bipolar resection devices (ACMI, Gyrus, Olympus, Storz, Wolf) have been introduced. Experimental and clinical data were available for four of these modifications (VISTA-ACMI, Gyrus, Olympus, Storz). The devices differ in terms of modification of the passive electrode (two loops, single loop, resectoscope sheath). Bipolar technology allows the use of 0.9% sodium chloride (instead of glycine) as irrigant. In all bipolar devices, a slight prolongation was noted for initiation of the cut, with the VISTA showing the poorest cutting behaviour. Finest apical dissection could be performed with the Storz device. Phase III-studies comparing bipolar and monopolar TURP showed advantages for bipolar concerning the rate of TUR-syndrome/fluid absorption, bleeding, catheter time, whereas the resection speed was similar. In two studies using two different devices (Gyrus, Olympus) a higher rate of urethral strictures was detected. We conclude that TURP still represents the reference standard in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Initial data suggest that bipolar technology is safe and effective. It may offer some advantages with respect to the reduction of TUR-syndrome, less conductive trauma (i.e. tissue charring), cheaper irrigation solution, and a shorter catheter time. In addition to already existing phase III-studies, larger randomized mulit-institutional trials will have to substantiate these advantages.

Plasma vaporisation of the prostate: initial clinical results

BACKGROUND

Laser vaporisation of the prostate has had a considerable impact in recent years. In an attempt to achieve tissue vaporisation with bipolar high-frequency generators, plasma vaporisation was recently introduced.

OBJECTIVE

To provide the first clinical information on bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to bladder outlet obstruction (BOO).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Thirty patients were included in this prospective bicentre study.

INTERVENTION

All patients underwent bipolar plasma vaporisation with a novel electrode (Olympus Winter & Ibe GmbH, Hamburg, Germany).

MEASUREMENTS

International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), bother score, maximum flow rate (Q(max)), and postvoid residual were evaluated at baseline and at the time of discharge as well as at 1, 3, and 6 mo after the intervention.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Mean preoperative prostate volume was 59±32 ml (range: 30-170), and mean operating time was 61±26 min (range: 20-140). Besides one reoperation (conventional transurethral prostatectomy) due to persistent obstruction, no major complication occurred intra- or postoperatively and no blood transfusion was required. Catheterisation time averaged 41±35 h (range: 18-192). Transient mild to moderate dysuria was noted in four patients (13%). At 1, 3, and 6 mo, Q(max) increased from 6.6±2.7 ml/s preoperative to 17.3±4.7 ml/s (p<0.01), 18.5±4.6 ml/s (p<0.01), and 18.1±5.0 ml/s (p<0.01), respectively. The IPSS decreased from 20.8±3.6 to 10.4±3.5 (p<0.01), 8.2±2.9 (p<0.01), and 8.1±3.1 (p<0.01), respectively. These data represent a small nonrandomised study cohort with limited follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Our initial experience indicates that bipolar plasma vaporisation might be a safe and effective treatment option for patients with LUTS due to BOO. To define the potential role of this novel technique, randomised trials with longer follow-up are mandatory.

Transurethral Electrovapor Resection versus Standard Transurethral Resection Treatment for a Large Prostate: A 2-Year Follow-Up Study Conducted in Taiwan

INTRODUCTION

Those patients featuring a large prostate and undergoing transurethral resection typically face a longer duration of surgery, they have a higher degree of hemorrhage and a higher irrigant volume required for the procedure, and they tend to reflect a higher incidence of morbidity than is the case for a small prostate. We report on the relative safety and efficacy of transurethral electrovapor resection of the prostate (TUVRP) as compared with standard transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for Taiwanese patients having a prostate size >50 ml.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-six symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia patients featuring a prostate size >50 ml were randomized and underwent either TUVRP using wedge loop or standard TURP. Perioperative parameters, treatment outcome, and adverse events associated with the surgical procedure are assessed herein.

RESULTS

Mean operation time, changes in hemoglobin levels, resected prostate weight, perioperative irrigant volume needed, and incidences of recatheterizations and readmissions, all differed significantly when the two surgical procedures were compared. The average expense differences for the two procedures were impressive (p < 0.0001). No postoperative intergroup sexual dysfunction differences were noted. Clinical improvements following either TUVRP or TURP were significant and sustained for at least a period of 2 years. Intergroup comparison of International Prostate Symptom Score, quality of life, peak flow rate, and postvoid residual volume revealed no significant differences at 2 years (p = 0.45, 0.48, 0.12, and 0.29, respectively). The need for postoperative medical retreatment and/or reoperation did not differ significantly between the two groups (p = 0.62 and p = 0.56, respectively, at 6 months and p = 0.47 and p = 0.48, respectively, at 2 years).

CONCLUSIONS

The TUVRP procedure offers advantages as regards a number of perioperative parameters when compared with the TURP procedure, and it seems that TUVRP might provide at least an equivalent treatment outcome as is the case for TURP.

Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)--incidence, management, and prevention

OBJECTIVES

To update the complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), including management and prevention based on technological evolution.

METHODS

Based on a MEDLINE search from 1989 to 2005, the 2003 results of quality management of Baden-Württemberg, and long-term personal experience at three German centers, the incidence of complications after TURP was analyzed for three subsequent periods: early (1979-1994); intermediate (1994-1999); and recent (2000-2005) with recommendations for management and prevention.

RESULTS

Technological improvements such as microprocessor-controlled units, better armamentarium such as video TUR, and training helped to reduce perioperative complications (recent vs. early) such as transfusion rate (0.4% vs. 7.1%), TUR syndrome (0.0% vs. 1.1%), clot retention (2% vs. 5%), and urinary tract infection (1.7% vs. 8.2%). Urinary retention (3% vs. 9%) is generally attributed to primary detrusor failure rather than to incomplete resection. Early urge incontinence occurs in up to 30-40% of patients; however, late iatrogenic stress incontinence is rare (<0.5%). Despite an increasing age (55% of patients are older than 70), the associated morbidity of TURP maintained at a low level (<1%) with a mortality rate of 0-0.25%. The major late complications are urethral strictures (2.2-9.8%) and bladder neck contractures (0.3-9.2%). The retreatment rate range is 3-14.5% after five years.

CONCLUSIONS

TURP still represents the gold standard for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia with decreasing complication rates. Technological alternatives such as bipolar and laser treatments may further minimize the risks of this technically difficult procedure.

Transurethrale Resektion bei benigner Prostatahyperplasie

Transurethral resection of the prostate still represents the "gold standard" in surgical treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic enlargement (BPE). New demands were made on transurethral electrosurgery with the appearance of alternative, minimal invasive procedures. Bleeding complications had to be reduced. Different attempts were made to improve the conventional TURP. Band loops and roller bars were developed in order to gain a more effective coagulation during the cutting process by a larger tissue contact. Major advances could be achieved by modifications of the high-frequency generator. Improved procedures like the "Coagulating-Intermittent-Cutting" (CIC), the "Instant-Response-", as well as the "Dry-Cut-Technology" combine cutting and coagulating effects to realize lowered bleeding and an efficient resection process. The introduction of bipolar currency flow opens the possibility of conventional TUR-P with saline solutions and thus to the theoretical avoidance of the TUR-syndrome. By the neoadjuvant use of 5alpha-reductase-inhibitors before planned TUR-P, bleeding- and irrigation fluid absorption should be reduced by lowering perfusion and the size of the prostate. Regarding these innovative approaches which improve the surgical standard and minimize the risk of perioperative complications, transurethral electrosurgery remains the method of choice in instrumental therapy of symptomatic BPE. In the future efficacy and costs will be comparable to those of the transurethral laser-resection or laser-vaporisation.

Randomized comparison of loops for transurethral resection of the prostate: preliminary results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the comparative efficacy and morbidity of standard transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) and transurethral vaporesection (TUVRP) using four types of loops.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a one-to-one randomized study, 50 patients with lower urinary-tract symptoms suggestive of bladder outlet obstruction and benign prostatic enlargement underwent TURP. Clinical data were collected using digital rectal examination, transrectal ultrasonography for evaluation of prostate volume, IPSS and IIEF-5 questionnaires, and serum prostate specific antigen concentrations. Intraoperative blood loss and fluid absorption were evaluated by measuring serum hemoglobin and respiratory alcohol concentration. Patients were followed at 3 and 18 months with evaluation of clinical symptoms, flow rates, residual urine volumes, and complications.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in blood loss, intraoperative fluid absorption, procedure time, or weight of the resected tissue between standard TURP and TUVRP with the various loops. No significant complications (infections, urethral stricture, reintervention) were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

In this comparison of the clinical outcome and morbidity of standard TURP versus different loops for TUVRP, there were no significant differences in any of the parameters evaluated.

Transurethral electrovaporization vs transurethral resection for symptomatic prostatic obstruction: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of transurethral electrovaporization (TUEVP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for symptomatic bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODS

Publications comparing TUEVP and TURP were identified systematically using Medline, the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register and other database search engines. From a total of 25 randomized controlled trials, 20 studies met the predefined inclusion criteria and were subjected to a formal meta-analysis. Primary endpoints were symptom scores and peak urinary flow rates. Secondary endpoints included transfusion requirements, operative time, duration of catheterization, incidence of adverse events, hospital stay, re-operation rates and sexual dysfunction.

RESULTS

After 1 year of follow-up there was no significant difference between TUEVP and TURP in urinary symptom scores and peak urinary flow rates. There was heterogeneity at baseline for both primary outcome measures. TUEVP was associated with significantly lower transfusion requirements, a shorter catheterization time, and a shorter length of stay. TURP was associated with a lower risk of urinary retention afterward and re-operation than was TUEVP.

CONCLUSION

This formal meta-analysis suggests that both TUEVP and TURP in patients with symptomatic bladder outlet obstruction provide comparable improvements in maximum urinary flow rates and symptom scores. While comparative analysis is limited by the methodological shortcomings of the underlying studies and the short follow-up, both TURP and TUEVP may offer distinct advantages in terms of secondary outcomes. A future, well-designed, multicentre randomized clinical trial with extended follow-up may be needed to better define the role of vaporization techniques in treating patients with symptomatic BPH.

A Systematic Review of Holmium Laser Prostatectomy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

PURPOSE

We undertook a systematic review to assess the safety and efficacy of holmium laser prostatectomy compared to transurethral resection of the prostate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched literature databases through August 2002. Holmium laser studies, including holmium laser resection of the prostate (HoLRP) and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), of any design, and the transurethral prostatectomy (TURP) arms of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with sample sizes greater than 50 patients, date restricted to 1995 onward, were included for comparison.

RESULTS

Three RCTs comparing HoLRP and TURP, and 2 RCTs comparing HoLEP and TURP were identified. For each of the holmium procedures there was also 1 nonrandomized comparative study and a number of case series (HoLRP 13, HoLEP 10). With the exception of 1 randomized trial the quality of the available evidence was poor, with the other RCTs lacking information regarding methods of randomization, allocation concealment and blinding. The majority of studies were characterized by relatively short followup periods and significant losses to followup. In terms of safety the data suggest that the holmium laser procedures are superior to TURP with regard to a number of key indicators of blood loss (transfusion rates, postoperative bladder irrigation, duration of catheterization and length of hospital stay), although amount of blood loss was rarely reported. In terms of efficacy the holmium laser procedures appear to be similarly effective to TURP in relieving the symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

Holmium laser prostatectomy is at least as effective as TURP for managing the symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia. However, at the present time the long-term durability of the holmium procedures with respect to TURP cannot be determined due to a lack of published studies with sufficient followup.

Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP) is effective, safe and durable

Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP) is one of the alternative, minimally invasive procedures to treat BPH with promising initial results. We reviewed the available English literature to evaluate the long-term safety, efficacy and durability of TUVP using various vaporizing electrodes. We performed a MEDLINE keyword search and assessed all prospective randomized studies, which compared TUVP to standard transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) that reached 1 y follow-up. Data were analysed for improvement of IPSS and Q(max), operation time, hospital stay, perioperative bleeding, postoperative irritative symptoms, long-term side effects and reoperation rate. We reviewed a total of 244 TUVP compared to 259 TURP patients in six prospective randomized studies that reached 1 y follow-up. Less perioperative bleeding, shorter catheterization time (mean of TUVP: 30 h vs TURP: 61 h) and shorter hospital stay (mean of 1.4 days vs TURP: 3.4 days) were reported in the TUVP patients. The improvement in IPSS (71%) and mean Q(max) (20 ml/s) was similar in both groups. The reoperation rate was 2% per year in both vaporization and resection patients. In conclusion, analysis of the prospective randomized trials that reached 1 year follow-up revealed that TUVP is as effective as standard TURP in the treatment of BPH. Long-term side effects and reoperation rates are comparable and the initial improvement was maintained over 1 year for the majority of patients.

Electrocautery: Principles and Practice

We explain the basic physics of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Modifications of electrodes or high-frequency units that should improve TURP are discussed. Finally, we introduce Coagulating Intermittent Cutting (CIC), which is a TURP using a modified high-frequency generator. Results of in vitro experiments and the first data from a multicenter trial are demonstrated.

5-year outcome of a prospective randomized trial to compare transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate and standard transurethral resection

OBJECTIVES

To update our prospective randomized trial comparing the safety, efficacy, and durability of transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP) using the VaporTrode with standard transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

METHODS

A total of 104 patients, taken from the waiting list for surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to TUVP (52 patients, mean age 67.5 years) or TURP (52 patients, mean age 70.2 years). In each group, 51, 47, and 40 patients completed 1, 2, and 3 years of follow-up, respectively. Of the 104 patients, 27 TURP and 26 TUVP patients completed 5 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

Both groups were comparable in terms of the mean preoperative International Prostate Symptom Score, quality-of-life score, maximal urinary flow rate, and postvoid residual volume. The follow-up data at 5 years showed a significant and maintained improvement in the mean International Prostate Symptom Score (TUVP: 5.9 +/- 6.3 versus TURP: 8.6 +/- 7.1, P = 0.16), quality-of-life score (TUVP: 1.1 +/- 1.2 versus TURP: 1.7 +/- 1.4, P = 0.09), and mean maximal urinary flow rate (TUVP: 21 +/- 9 mL/s versus TURP: 17.9 +/- 13.1 mL/s, P = 0.17), with decreases in the mean postvoid residual volume (TUVP: 27.3 +/- 44.3 mL versus TURP: 10.7 +/- 13.1 mL, P = 0.08). Two patients in each group (4%) developed urethral strictures. Two TURP patients (4%) developed bladder neck strictures compared with one TUVP patient (2%). In each arm, 7 patients (13%) underwent reoperation during a 5-year period (approximate reoperation rate: 3% in each arm per year). Postoperatively and during 3 years of follow-up, impotence was reported in 17% of the TUVP group and 11% of the TURP group (P = 0.49); retrograde ejaculation was reported in 72% of the TUVP group and 89% of the TURP group (P = 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Our 5-year follow-up results confirm that TUVP is as effective as standard TURP in the treatment of moderate-size benign prostatic hyperplasia. The reoperation rate and long-term complication rate are comparable and the initial improvement has been maintained during a 5-year period for most patients in both groups.

A 4-year follow-up of a randomized prospective study comparing transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate with neodymium: YAG laser therapy for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety, efficacy and durability of neodymium (Nd):YAG laser prostatectomy with transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP) for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From March 1995 to March 1997, 180 patients with bladder outlet obstruction secondary to BPH were randomized equally either to Nd:YAG laser therapy or TUVP. Laser therapy combined two different techniques, side-fire coagulation of the lateral lobes and contact vaporization of the median lobe. Before treatment the two groups had a comparable International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality-of-life score (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), and prostate and adenoma volume. In all, 62 and 78 patients completed the 1, 2, 3 and 4-year follow-up from the laser and TUVP groups, respectively.

RESULTS

At each follow-up, the IPSS, QoL, Qmax and PVR were significantly better and more durable in the TUVP than in the laser group. In the TUVP and laser groups respectively, at the 4-year follow-up the mean value of the IPSS was 3.7 vs 11.9, the QoL 1.3 vs 3.1, the Qmax 21.4 vs 13.6 mL/s and the PVR 25.1 vs 64.6 mL (all P < 0.001). The mean prostate and adenoma volume were significantly lower after TUVP than after laser therapy (P < 0.001) at the 1- and 4-year follow-up, with final values of 27.9 vs 35.9 and 11.7 vs 20 mL (both P < 0.001) for the TUVP and laser groups, respectively. Retrograde ejaculation was significantly more common after TUVP (63%) than after laser therapy (18%; P < 0.001). Impotence was reported in 8% of men after TUVP and in none after laser therapy (P = 0.040). The re-operation rate was 12% after TUVP and 38% after laser treatment (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

These 4-year follow-up results confirm that TUVP is significantly more effective and durable than the Nd:YAG laser for treating BPH. Residual obstructing adenoma was the main cause of failure in the laser group, which reflects the inadequacy of laser therapy for removing the adenoma.

Voiding patterns in patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence: urodynamic and demographic analysis

PURPOSE

A significant percentage of patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence have been reported to void by Valsalva's maneuver, which is our observation as well. We determine the mechanism of voiding in patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence and correlate this to demographic data, urodynamic parameters and outcome after artificial urinary sphincter implantation, and identify possible risk factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Videourodynamic data from 61 consecutive patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence were reviewed to determine voiding patterns. The causes of incontinence were radical prostatectomy in 58 patients and transurethral resection of the prostate followed by radiation therapy in 3. The relationship between voiding patterns and demographic data (age, diabetes mellitus, degree and duration of incontinence, history of radiation therapy or treated bladder neck contracture) as well as urodynamic parameters (bladder capacity, compliance, instability, sensation, leak point pressure and residual urine) were studied. After artificial urinary sphincter implantation outcome was assessed in relation to the voiding patterns.

RESULTS

Stress incontinence was present in all patients while concomitant urgency/urge incontinence was present in 48%. Of the patients 43 (70.5%) voided by detrusor contraction (group 1) while the remaining 18 (29.5%) voided by straining (group 2). Mean patient age +/- SD was 70.8 +/- 6.9 and 69.2 +/- 7.2 years, and duration of incontinence was 48 +/- 33 and 46 +/- 30 months in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p >0.05). Also, no significant differences were found between the groups with regard to other demographic data. Delayed first sensation (at volume greater than 140 ml.) was seen in 42.5% and 29.4%, capacity less than 300 ml. in 41.9% and 39%, impaired/poor compliance in 25.6% and 22.2%, bladder instability in 16.3% and 5.6%, abdominal leak point pressure 60 cm. H(2)O or less in 59.4% and 60% and residual urine greater than 50 ml. in 11.6% and 17.6% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p >0.05). After artificial urinary sphincter implantation 35% and 22.2% of patients used greater than 1 pad a day in groups 1 and 2, respectively. One patient in each group reported difficulty during urination and both patients had no residual urine.

CONCLUSIONS

No identifiable demographic or urodynamic risk factors could be detected in association with the strain pattern of voiding in patients with post-prostatectomy incontinence. The absence of a difference in bladder compliance, residual urine volume and outcome after artificial urinary sphincter implantation between detrusor and strain voiders would suggest no increased risk for complications in the strain voiding group.

Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate: is it any better than conventional transurethral resection of the prostate?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP), compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), as a treatment for men with symptomatic benign prostatic enlargement (BPE).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 235 men with symptomatic BPE in four hospitals in the South-East of England were randomized to TUVP (115) and TURP (120). Patients were assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the Short Form-36 (SF-36), EuroQol and sexual function questionnaire, uroflowmetry, ultrasonographic measurement of residual urine volume, pressure-flow urodynamics and transrectal ultrasonography.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in the objective and subjective outcome after TURP and TUVP. The latter was associated with a lower transfusion rate than TURP but this did not result in an overall reduction in complications. There was no difference in the length of hospital stay. Overall, the two operations produced equivalent results and equivalent complication rates.

CONCLUSION

TUVP is an effective treatment for symptomatic BPE, with results equivalent to TURP. TUVP has not led to the expected reduction in early postoperative morbidity or shorter hospital stays.

Changing therapeutic regimens in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clinical and economic considerations

About one-quarter of men aged 50 years and older experience voiding problems due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Until about 10 years ago, surgery (particularly transurethral resection of the prostate) was the only effective treatment for symptomatic BPH. Over the last decade, several new treatments have been introduced. These include different types of medication (alpha-blockers and finasteride), thermotherapy, laser prostatectomy, needle ablation and vaporisation methods. The diffusion of these less invasive treatment modalities has resulted not only in a decrease in the age-adjusted surgery rates, but also in an increase of the total number of men treated for BPH. A large number of studies on clinical benefits and risks reveal that the conventional types of surgery remain the most effective treatments, whereas new interventional therapies require a shorter hospital stay and result in fewer short term complications. The efficacy of medication is lower than that of interventional treatments. Adverse effects include dizziness and orthostatic hypotension (alpha-blockers) and decreased sexual function (finasteride), but are generally mild. There is some evidence that medication and minimally invasive treatments may preclude eventual surgical treatment, but the precise effect is difficult to estimate because of differences in the study populations and the relatively short study periods. As a result of the dynamic nature of BPH treatment and the lack of long term data, the cost effects of the introduction of the various new treatments are also difficult to assess. Given the aging of the population and the growing percentage of patients with BPH for whom any type of treatment can be considered, a considerable increase of total costs can be expected. Long term prospective studies are necessary to gain insight into the most cost-effective treatment for different patient groups.

A 3-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial comparing transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate with standard transurethral prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety, efficacy and durability of transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP) with standard transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 104 patients admitted from the waiting list for surgery for BPH were randomized to either TUVP (52 patients, mean age 67.5 years) or TURP (52 patients, mean age 70.2 years); 51, 47 and 40 patients in each arm completed 1, 2 and 3 years of follow-up, respectively. Patients were assessed at baseline and during the follow-up using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the associated quality-of-life score (QoL), postvoid residual volume (PVR) and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax).

RESULTS

Both groups had comparable mean IPSS, QoL, Qmax and PVR at baseline. The mean (SD) values for TUVP and TURP, respectively, at 3 years showed a significant and maintained improvement in IPSS, at 4.1 (3.3) and 7.1 (6.2) (P = 0.01), in QoL, at 1.0 (0.9) and 1.6 (1.4) (P = 0.04), and in Qmax, at 22.2 (8.5) and 18 (7.1) mL/s (P = 0.02), with decreases in PVR of 30 (38) and 21.9 (26.2) mL (P = 0.27). The re-operation rate in each group was 4% during the first year, 4% during the second year and 5% during the third year. After surgery and at 1, 2 and 3 years of follow-up, impotence was reported in 17% of the TUVP group and 11% of the TURP group (P = 0.49), and retrograde ejaculation in 72% of the TUVP group and 89% of the TURP group (P = 0.47).

CONCLUSION

The 3-year follow-up results confirm that TUVP is as effective as standard TURP in the treatment of moderate-sized BPH. The long-term side-effects and complications were comparable and the initial improvement was maintained over 3 years in most patients in both groups.

Transurethral vaporization of the prostate: current techniques

Electrovaporization has quickly become a popular procedure for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia. By using standard transurethral electrosurgical technology, electrovaporization offers standard transurethral loop-like resection and transurethral prostatectomy (TURP)-like efficacy with less morbidity than that associated with TURP. Through a combination of two electrosurgical effects (vaporization and desiccation), electrovaporization ablates significant volumes of prostatic tissue with each passage of the electrode. Newly designed thicker loop electrodes have led to a modification of the original electrovaporization technique. "Vaporizing-resection" adds the advantages of transurethral resection to those of electrovaporization with the use of one electrode. Very large glands can be treated efficiently, and prostatic tissue specimens are produced. Moreover, additional vaporization of tissue occurs with minimized bleeding. This report reviews basic electrosurgical principles, electrode design, and factors that affect vaporizing efficiency. Current long-term data on electrovaporization compared with TURP are summarized, and pilot studies evaluating vaporizing- resection have shown promising results. A new technology that has entered the market--bipolar electrovaporization--is also discussed. Finally, combination therapy and Columbia's 4-year experience with vaporization techniques are discussed.

New technologies in transurethral resection of the prostate

Different ablative treatments are in clinical use to lower perioperative morbidity and to maintain efficacy of transurethral resection of the prostate. Modifications to electrodes or high frequency units, or both, as well as improvements in laser technology have been tried. Transurethral resection is performed with a modified high frequency generator. The technique of 'coagulating intermittent cutting' allows reduction in morbidity and maintains the advantages of classical transurethral resection.