Current evidence of ThuLEP for BPH: A review of literature

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.

Results from a global multicenter registry of 6193 patients to refine endoscopic anatomical enucleation of the prostate (REAP) by evaluating trends and outcomes and nuances of prostate enucleation in a real-world setting

PURPOSE

To collect a multicentric, global database to assess current preferences and outcomes for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP).

METHODS

Endourologists experienced in EEP from across the globe were invited to participate in the creation of this retrospective registry. Surgical procedures were performed between January 2020 and August 2022.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

lower urinary tract symptoms not responding to or worsening despite medical therapy and absolute indication for surgery.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

prostate cancer, concomitant lower urinary tract surgery, previous prostate/urethral surgery, pelvic radiotherapy.

RESULTS

Ten centers from 7 countries, involving 13 surgeons enrolled 6193 patients. Median age was 68 [62-74] years. 2326 (37.8%) patients had large prostates (> 80 cc). The most popular energy modality was the Holmium laser. The most common technique used for enucleation was the 2-lobe (48.8%). 86.2% of the procedures were performed under spinal anesthesia. Median operation time was 67 [50-95] minutes. Median postoperative catheter time was 2 [1, 3] days. Urinary tract infections were the most reported complications (4.7%) followed by acute urinary retention (4.1%). Post-operative bleeding needing additional intervention was reported in 0.9% of cases. 3 and 12-month follow-up visits showed improvement in symptoms and micturition parameters. Only 8 patients (1.4%) required redo surgery for residual adenoma. Stress urinary incontinence was reported in 53.9% of patients and after 3 months was found to persist in 16.2% of the cohort.

CONCLUSION

Our database contributes real-world data to support EEP as a truly well-established global, safe minimally invasive intervention and provides insights for further research.

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

OBJECTIVE

To compare intra and early postoperative outcomes between pulsed-wave and continuous-wave Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (PW-ThuFLEP vs CW-ThuFLEP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

METHODS

238 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia underwent PW-ThuFLEP (118 patients) vs CW-ThuFLEP (120 patients). Preoperative prostate volume, adenoma volume, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and hemoglobin values were recorded. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual volume, and International Index of Erectile Function-5 score (IIEF-5) were assessed. Operative time, enucleation time, enucleation efficiency, catheterization time, irrigation volume, hospital stay, hemoglobin drop, and postoperative complications were recorded. Micturition improvements and sexual outcomes were evaluated 3months after surgery.

RESULTS

CW-ThuFLEP showed shorter operative time (61.5 vs 67.4 minutes, P = .04). Enucleation time (50.2 vs 53.3 minutes, P = .12), enucleation efficiency (0.8 vs 0.7 g/min, P = .38), catheterization time (2.2 vs 2.1days, P = .29), irrigation volume (32.9 vs 32.8L, P = .71), hospital stay (2.8 vs 2.6days, P = .29) and hemoglobin drop (0.38 vs 0.39 g/dL, P = .53) were comparable. No significant difference in complication rate was observed. At 3-month follow-up, the procedures did not show any significant difference in IPSS, Qmax, post-void residual volume, IIEF-5, and PSA value.

CONCLUSION

PW-ThuFLEP and CW-ThuFLEP both relieve lower urinary tract symptoms equally, with high efficacy and safety. Operative time was significantly shorter with CW-ThuFLEP, but with a small difference with low clinical impact. Enucleation time, enucleation efficiency, catheterization time, irrigation volume, hospital stay, hemoglobin and PSA drop, complication rate, and sexual outcomes showed no differences.

Thulium: YAG vs continuous-wave thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate: do potential advantages of thulium fiber lasers translate into relevant clinical differences?

PURPOSE

To compare endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using a thulium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Tm:YAG) laser and a super-pulsed thulium fiber laser set in continuous-wave (CW) mode, and to evaluate whether theoretical advantages of thulium fiber lasers, related to their shorter wavelength, translate into relevant clinical differences.

METHODS

In total, 110 patients suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to undergo either thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) or CW thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (CW-ThuFLEP). Intraoperative and postoperative variables and complications were compared. Micturition improvement was assessed at 3-month follow-up using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), post-void residual urine (PVR) and maximum flow rate (Qmax). Erectile function was evaluated using the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5).

RESULTS

No significant differences between the ThuLEP and CW-ThuFLEP groups were found in terms of operative time (70.69 vs 72.41 min), enucleation time (50.23 vs 53.33 min), enucleated tissue weight (40.2 vs 41.9 g), enucleation efficiency (0.80 vs 0.79 g/min), catheterization time (2.45 vs 2.57 days), hospital stay (2.82 vs 2.95 days) and hemoglobin drop (1.05 vs 1.27 g/dl). At 3-month follow-up, no significant differences were found in IPSS (5.09 vs 5.81), Qmax (26.51 vs 27.13 ml/s), PVR (25.22 vs 23.81 ml) and IIEF-5 (14.01 vs 14.54).

CONCLUSION

ThuLEP and CW-ThuFLEP were equivalent in relieving patients from LUTS and improving micturition. Theoretical advantages of the TFL, such as shallower penetration depth and improved vaporization capacity, did not translate into relevant perioperative outcomes or clinical differences.