A prospective study to compare changes in male sexual function following holmium laser enucleation of prostate versus transurethral resection of prostate

Shifting Trends in Prostate Treatment: A Systematic Review Comparing Transurethral Resection of the Prostate and Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate

Our systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness and suitability of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) as a treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in comparison to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). We analyzed 12 studies involving male participants aged 45-85 years, all of whom had BPH. In our analysis, we compared HoLEP and TURP, with a focus on several primary outcomes, including postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), postvoid residual (PVR) volume, maximum flow rate (Qmax), and changes in sexual function post-treatment. HoLEP demonstrated advantages in certain aspects when compared to TURP. HoLEP generally resulted in an improved postoperative IPSS in some studies, but not all studies showed a significant difference when compared to TURP. HoLEP was associated with improved Qmax in most studies, but one study found no significant difference between HoLEP and TURP. Patients who underwent HoLEP showed improvement in the PVR volume in some studies, while others found no significant change in the PVR volume with either HoLEP or TURP. Some studies reported a reduction in orgasm and ejaculatory scores following TURP, while no significant changes were observed in erectile function, intercourse satisfaction, and overall satisfaction scores. It is worth noting that previous reviews and meta-analyses had limited data on the effects of HoLEP and TURP on sexual dysfunction. TURP is associated with a higher risk of morbidity and mortality, which has led to its replacement with HoLEP as the gold standard for treating BPH, particularly due to its size-independent applicability. HoLEP also demonstrated greater efficacy in the postoperative period.

Impact of Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia on Sexual Function: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Erectile Function and Ejaculatory Function

CONTEXT

Several sexual side effects, including erectile, ejaculatory, and orgasmic dysfunction, were reported with the majority of surgical procedures for benign prostatic obstruction (BPO).

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review current evidence regarding the impact of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) surgery on sexual function.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive bibliographic search on the MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was conducted in July 2021. The population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) model was used to define study eligibility. Studies were Included if they assessed patients with BPO and related lower urinary tract symptoms (P) undergoing BPH surgery (I) with or without a comparison between surgical treatments (C) evaluating the impact on sexual function (O). Retrospective and prospective primary studies were included. A pooled analysis was conducted on studies including the postoperative assessment of International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-5, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction (MSHQ-EjD; Function and/or Bother), or retrograde ejaculation (RE) rate (PROSPERO database ID: CRD42020177907).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 151 studies investigating 20 531 patients were included. Forty-eight randomized controlled trials evaluating 5045 individuals were eligible for the meta-analysis. In most studies (122, 80.8%), only erectile and/or ejaculatory function was evaluated. A substantial number of articles (67, 44.4%) also used nonvalidated tools to evaluate erectile and/or ejaculatory function. The pooled analysis showed no statistically significant changes in IIEF-5 score compared with baseline for the transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP; weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.76 pts; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.1, 1.62; p = 0.08), laser procedure (WMD 0.33 pts; 95% CI -0.1, 0.77; p = 0.13), and minimally invasive treatment (WMD -1.37 pts; 95% CI -3.19, 0.44; p = 0.14) groups. A statistically significantly higher rate of RE was found after TURP (risk ratio [RR] 13.31; 95% CI 8.37, 21.17; p < 0.00001), other electrosurgical procedures (RR 34.77; 95% CI 10.58, 127.82; p < 0.00001), and the entire laser group (RR 17.37; 95% CI 5.93, 50.81; p < 0.00001). No statistically significant increase in RE rate was described after most of the minimally invasive procedures (p > 0.05). The pooled analysis of MSHQ-EjD scores was possible only for prostatic urethral lift, showing no statistically significant difference between baseline and post-treatment MSHQ-EjD Function scores (WMD -0.80 pts; 95% CI -2.41, 0.81; p = 0.33), but postoperative MSHQ-EjD Bother scores were significantly higher (WMD 0.76 pts; 95% CI 0.22, 1.30; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Erectile function appears to be unaffected by most surgical procedures for BPO. RE is a very common adverse event of BPH surgery, although emerging minimally invasive surgical procedures could be associated with a lower risk.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery can have an impact on sexual function, mainly involving ejaculatory function.

From open simple to robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) for large benign prostate hyperplasia: the time has come

PURPOSE

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) has recently been studied as an alternative to open simple prostatectomy or endoscopic treatment options. At present, there is no defined recommendation for a robotic procedure as a standard surgical technique to treat large benign prostate hyperplasia.

METHODS

Several robotic techniques have been described since 2007. Contemporaneously, multiple endoscopic enucleation techniques have been proposed. Nevertheless, open simple prostatectomy still remains a mainstay of therapy. We aimed to evaluate the development of robotic-assisted prostatectomy for large benign prostatic obstruction, thus comparing the technical aspects and clinical outcomes with open and endoscopic enucleation.

RESULTS

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy provides significantly less blood loss and shorter hospital stay but longer operative time compared to open simple prostatectomy. Compared to endoscopic treatments, robotic approaches have a similar perioperative outcome, but cause less urethral trauma or potential bladder neck strictures. Moreover, concomitant bladder pathologies can be treated within the same setting.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy is an effective and safe technique, and can hence be considered to become the preferred first-line therapy to treat patients with obstructive large prostate glands.

Sexual and ejaculatory function after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate: a single-center experience

Currently available surgical treatments for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) due to Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO) are associated with an increased risk of sexual dysfunction. The aim of our study is to compare sexual and ejaculatory function after Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and Bipolar Transurethral Enucleation of the Prostate (B-TUEP). We performed a retrospective analysis of data prospectively collected from 62 (44.9%) and 76 (55.1%) patients who underwent HoLEP and B-TUEP, respectively. Erectile function and ejaculation characteristics were assessed with the International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) domain and the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory function (MSHQ-EJ) questionnaires. Our study recorded no change in erectile function and no significant difference in rates of preserved antegrade ejaculation after both surgeries. One month after surgery, rates of physical pain/discomfort and perceived decreased physical pleasure during ejaculation were higher in HoLEP than B-TUEP patients (all p < 0.03). Moreover, HoLEP patients were more bothered by their ejaculatory difficulties than B-TUEP men (p = 0.03). At 3- and 12-months follow-up, all ejaculation-related differences disappeared. In conclusion, both procedures are valid alternatives for BPO treatment as they offer comparable urinary and sexual outcomes in the long term. However, in the first month after surgery, HoLEP patients present with more ejaculatory difficulties.

The New American Urological Association Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Clinical Guidelines: 2019 Update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this paper was to analyze the efficacy of the current modalities available to surgically treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

RECENT FINDINGS

There have been significant surgical advancements for the treatment of BPH, including an increasing development and utilization of minimally invasive surgical techniques (MISTs). These procedures have varying outcomes that are critical to understand. In addition, MISTs have important adverse effects, though have minimized effects on sexual function when compared to more invasive surgical techniques. It is important for all urologists to be familiar with the surgical techniques available to treat BPH and the updated American Urological Association (AUA) Guidelines. Further studies evaluating efficacy, safety, and sexual functioning will help guide care in the future and evolve practice.

Sexual outcomes of endoscopic enucleation of prostate

The emergence of various endoscopic enucleation techniques in the past decade has provided surgeons with more options and opportunities in performing enucleation. With the same surgical principle as holmium laser enucleation of prostate, the early results of different techniques were comparable. However, sexual outcomes of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) were less commonly reported than the voiding and urodynamic outcomes. In this review, the sexual outcomes including erectile function, ejaculatory and orgasmic function of various endoscopic enucleation technique would be studied. The overall sexual outcomes were heterogeneous and inconclusive. Outcomes measurement, sample size calculation, hypothesis generation and selection criteria were not specifically designed for sexual outcomes or even available. There were also limitations in the individual sexual assessment tools. Nonetheless, most studies showed no significant deterioration of erectile function after EEP, and ejaculation dysfunction was common. Looking forward in the field of benign prostatic enlargement surgery, the 'one size fits all' notion should be abandoned. Treatment should be tailor-made according to the prostate size, co-morbidities and sexual needs. The sexual outcomes of enucleation have to be better studied and defined. More prospective controlled studies focusing primarily on sexual functions are needed. For enucleation surgeons, exploring different ejaculatory-sparing technique could be the golden opportunities in further consolidating the role and expanding the indication of enucleation surgery.

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

The acronym EEP, coding for transurethral Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate, was introduced in 2016 by the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines panel on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Since then, a laser-based treatment, Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP), and the current-based treatment of bipolar enucleation of the prostate (BipoLEP) are equally appreciated as valuable options for the management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). This was mainly inspired by the results of two meta-analyses on randomized controlled trials, comparing open prostatectomy with either Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) or bipolar enucleation of the prostate (BipoLEP). Prior to that, HoLEP was embraced as the only valid option for transurethral enucleation, although evidence for equivalence existed as early as 2006, but was not recognized due to a plethora of acronyms for bipolar energy-based treatments and practiced HoLEP-centrism. On the other hand, the academic discourse focused on different (other) laser approaches that came up, led by Thulium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Tm:YAG) Vapoenucleation (ThuVEP) in 2009 and, finally, transurethral anatomical enucleation with Tm:YAG support (thulium laser enucleation of the prostate, ThuLEP) in 2010. Initially, the discourse on lasers focused on the different properties of lasers rather than technique or surgical anatomy, respectively. In and after 2016, the discussion ultimately moved towards surgical technique and accepting anatomical preparation as the common of all EEP techniques (AEEP). Since then, the unspoken question has been raised, whether lasers are still necessary to perform EEP in light of existing evidence, given the total cost of ownership (TCO) for these generators. This article weighs the current evidence and comes to the conclusion that no evidence of superiority of one modality over another exists with regard to any endpoint. Therefore, in the sense of critical importance, AEEP can be safely and effectively performed without laser technologies and without compromise.

Efficacy and Safety of X-incision with Inversed Morcellation in Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: Comparison to Conventional Morcellation

Background

Three-quarters of aged men experience lower urinary tract symptoms with benign prostate hypertrophy (BPH). Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) are standard endosurgical procedures in patients with BPH. Previous studies reported better results in patients undergoing HoLEP than in those undergoing TURP.

Methods

This study compared the efficiency and safety of conventional morcellation and morcellation performed after X-incision during enucleation, a newly added technique in HoLEP. Overall, 174 patients were selected as the final study population. The populations were stratified with respect to resected volumes. A t-test were used to compare the conventional morcellation and X-incision procedure groups.

Results

In morcellation times and rates, there were significant differences in stratified resected mass (g) between the groups. The results also showed a decreased incidence of bladder injury as a surgical complication.

Conclusion

We believe morcellation performed after X-incision procedure during enucleation is efficient and safe for older adults with BPH.

Anterograde ejaculation preservation after endoscopic treatments in patients with bladder outlet obstruction: systematic review and pooled-analysis of randomized clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Despite the high rate of resolution, ejaculatory dysfunction still is the most common side effect related to surgical treatment of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). The aim of the present systematic review was to compare several technological treatment modalities for the management of lower urinary tract symptoms/BOO in terms of functional and sexual outcomes.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

All English language randomized controlled trials assessing the impact of different endoscopic treatments for BOO were evaluated. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) statement to evaluate PubMed®, Scopus®, and Web of Science™ databases (up to June 2019).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Our electronic search identified a total of 2221 papers in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Of these, 142 publications were identified for detailed review, which yielded 21 included in the present systematic review. All groups appeared similar with regards to preoperative IPSS/AUA Score, Qmax, and prostate volume (cc). Patients undergoing endoscopic treatments using ThuLEP, Greenlight or Prostate Artery Embolization techniques had lower-but not statistically significant- relative risk (RR) of retrograde ejaculation compared with conventional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) (RR: 0.90; P=0.35; RR: 0.71; P=0.1; RR0.73; P=0.11). Efficacy of those techniques was equal to TURP.

CONCLUSIONS

Data reporting anterograde ejaculation preservation after endoscopic treatment in patients with benign prostatic enlargement are sparse and heterogeneous. Pooled analyses suggest that new technological alternatives to conventional TURP might improve sexual outcomes, especially for non-ablative treatments.