Quality of life after photo-selective vaporization and holmium-laser enucleation of the prostate: 5-year outcomes

Predictors of postoperative storage symptoms in male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms: A retrospective analysis of prostate surgery for benign prostatic enlargement

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the effects of prostate surgery on storage symptoms in male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) from benign prostatic enlargement (BPE). This study aimed to identify patient characteristics associated with improved, unchanged, and deteriorated post-surgical storage symptoms and to identify the risk factors for non-improvement or deterioration.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 586 prostate surgeries performed between 2016 and 2022 at Yokosuka Kyosai Hospital was conducted on patients with LUTS and at least one storage symptom preoperatively. Patients with active urinary tract infection, prostate/bladder cancer, urethral strictures, or dementia were excluded. The study enrolled 230 patients and assessed storage symptoms using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS).

RESULTS

Overall, storage symptoms improved, remained unchanged, and deteriorated in 87.0%, 5.7%, and 7.4% of patients, respectively. The patients in the deteriorated group were significantly older, whereas those in the no-change group had smaller prostate volumes. Patient-reported outcome scores (IPSS, IPSS-QoL, and BII) were significantly higher in the improved group. The predictors of non-improvement included low IPSS storage score, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes mellitus. Predictors of deterioration included advanced age and low IPSS storage score.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe LUTS showed greater postoperative improvement in storage symptoms. A low IPSS storage score predicted non-improvement and deterioration. Advanced age, low IPSS storage score, and a history of cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus were identified as key predictors. Awareness of these factors may guide preoperative counseling and improve decision-making in prostate surgery, ensuring more personalized and effective treatment strategies.

Predictive factors for postoperative medication therapy for overactive bladder symptoms after holmium laser enucleation of prostate

OBJECTIVE

To preoperative factors that could predict the persisting storage symptoms after Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP).

METHODS

Medical records of 257 patients who underwent HoLEP between December 2014 and January 2021 were reviewed. Participants with a follow-up period exceeding 6 months were included. Preoperative data, including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), uroflowmetry, prostate size, and prostate-specific antigen, were collected. All participants underwent a preoperative urodynamic study. The correlation between perioperative variables and postoperative medication therapy (antimuscarinics or beta-3 agonists) was assessed.

RESULTS

Out of 257 participants in the study, 46 (18.6%) were allocated to the medication group, of which 25 (54.3%) initiated medication therapy postoperatively. The medication group showed worse postoperative IPSS storage symptom score and quality of life score compared to the medication-free group (p = 0.048 and p = 0.002, respectively), but no significant differences were observed in complications or operative variables. In the de-novo medication group, patients had lower preoperative Qmax , larger prostate volume, and smaller maximum cystometric capacity (MCC) compared to the persisting medication group (p = 0.020, p = 0.009, and p = 0.008, respectively). Overactive bladder (OAB) history, terminal detrusor overactivity (DO), and IPSS urgency item were identified as possible predictive factors for post-HoLEP medication use.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative factors such as OAB history, terminal DO, and IPSS urgency item may predict the need for post-HoLEP medication therapy. Further follow-up studies are warranted to understand the characteristics of the de-novo medication group due to the significant discomfort it can cause to patients.

Reimbursement of surgical procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia: are we disincentivizing complex care?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of how surgical benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) procedures are compensated in the United States and the implications of the current reimbursement system on the care of patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

The resource-based relative value care system is Medicare's current reimbursement model. There is strong evidence that the current system does not adequately account for complex care. Consequently, for BPH surgical procedures, treatment options best suited for complex patients are not adequately reimbursed which may have implications on healthcare delivery and outcomes.

SUMMARY

Inadequate reimbursement for certain BPH procedures may disincentivize the care of complex patients. Procedures such a holmium laser enucleation of the prostate are well suited for complex patients but have a steep learning curve. The incentive to learn and offer such procedures to complex patients may be unfairly influenced by reimbursement levels, which in the end penalizes patients and the treatments available to them.

Safety and Efficacy of Laser Enucleation of the Prostate in Elderly Patients - A Narrative Review

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common health condition in aging men resulting in lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and low quality of life (QoL). We aimed to review studies on laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) due to LUTS in elderly patients (>65 years) comparing different age groups, particularly considering functional outcomes, safety, and perioperative complications. A comprehensive search was conducted using the PubMed-MEDLINE, Web of Science, Wiley Online Library and Cochrane Library databases over the last 10 years until 7 October 2021 with the following search terms solely or in combination: “laser enucleation”, “prostate”, “laser prostatectomy”, “aging”, “elderly patients”, “older patients” and “age”. We identified 12 articles for inclusion in our analysis. Five studies focussed mainly on holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), one compared HoLEP to other laser prostatectomy procedures, two studies examined thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP), and two studies focused on GreenLight laser, one study focussed on potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) laser, and another study compared laser prostatectomy to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). These studies showed that LEP improved IPSS, Qmax and QoL compared to baseline regardless of age; no significant difference was reported among age groups. Although ASA scores and anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy rates are higher in elderly patients, studies revealed no significant difference in perioperative complication rates between age groups. Laser enucleation of the prostate is an effective and safe procedure in elderly patients, resulting in good functional outcomes, low morbidity, and few perioperative complications.

Enucleation vs vaporization of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a head-to-head comparison of the various outcomes and complications. A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Vaporization of the prostate (VP) and endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) are reliable and frequently used methods for BPO relief. Both surgeries utilize lasers and EAU recommends them in similar patient cohorts. Our objective was to compare intra- and perioperative results of patients who had undergone VP and EEP.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was performed in three databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science and Scopus). The detailed search strategy is available at Prospero, CRD42020204739. Primary outcomes were functional results (IPSS, QoL, PVR, Qmax), and secondary outcomes were intraoperative results, postoperative PSA and prostate volume, complications, and recurrence rate.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

VP required less operative time compared to EEP, mean difference=-5.51 (95%CI -7.52; -3.50). IPSS and Qmax for VP were worse after 12-month follow-up, mean difference=0.89 (95%CI 0.52; 1.27) and -3.7 (95%CI -4.56; -2.85), respectively, while QoL did not differ significantly. Postoperative PSA level was higher in the VP group, mean difference=2.28 (95%CI 2.00; 2.55). VP was associated with reduced Clavien-Dindo grade I (OR=4.16; 95%CI 2.96; 5.84) and grade II (OR=3.79; 95%CI 2.25; 6.39) complication rate, especially in terms of the percentage of blood transfusion and transient urinary incontinence. The rate of complications grade IIIa and higher was similar (3 - 6%). Reoperation rate was only estimated in one study and was significantly higher in the PVP group at 60 months of follow-up, 2.7% vs 0%, p<0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

EEP and VP share the efficacy and safety in BPH management. Our meta-analysis shows comparable complication rate in Clavien-Dindo III, VP superiority in operation time, and EEP superiority in long-term functional outcomes and PSA reduction.

Comparison of 532-nm GreenLight HPS laser with 980-nm diode laser vaporization of the prostate in treating patients with lower urinary tract symptom secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a meta-analysis

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 532-nm GreenLight HPS laser (PVP) vs 980-nm diode laser vaporization of the prostate (DVP) in treating patients with lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). PubMed, Cochrane Library databases, EMBASE (until Jun 2020), and original references of the included articles were searched. PRISMA checklist was followed. A total of four articles including 521 patients were studied. There was no significant difference in total operating time and lasering time of the two laser surgeries; however, a higher amount of total applied laser energy was delivered with DVP (P < 0.00001). The catheterization time after surgery in the PVP group was significantly longer than that in the DVP group (P = 0.0008), whereas the hospitalization time was significantly shorter than that in the DVP group (P = 0.02). Compared with baseline, there were significant improvements in the voiding variables over the observation period after surgery in both groups. PVP had a significant improvement in total international prostate symptom score (IPSS) (P = 0.0002) and quality of life (QoL) index (P = 0.003) compared with DVP after ≥12 months of postoperative follow-up. For complications after surgery, PVP had a larger number in needing for electrocautery to control bleeding (P = 0.02). Besides, the application of DVP resulted in a higher incidence of bladder neck contracture (P = 0.0007), dysuria (≥1 month) (P = 0.002), transient incontinence (P = 0.003), postoperative recatheterization (P = 0.02), and reoperation (P < 0.0001). The voiding parameters and micturition symptoms of patients with BPH after two kinds of laser surgery were significantly improved. However, PVP was more beneficial than DVP in terms of total IPSS, QoL index, and hospitalization time. Moreover, PVP showed a lower incidence of postoperative adverse events, but a higher risk of postoperative bleeding. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020203222.

Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate (PVP) and Transurethral Enucleation with a Bipolar System (TUEB): A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) and transurethral enucleation with a bipolar system (TUEB).

Patients and Methods

Patients who underwent PVP or TUEB surgery for lower urinary tract symptoms due to bladder outlet obstruction at our institution from September 2015 to May 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 83 patients (PVP: n=45, TUEB: n=38) who were available for follow-up at least 12 months after surgery were included. Preoperative characteristics, perioperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes-such as International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine volume (PVR), and complications-at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery were compared between the two groups.

Results

Although differences in age, IPSS, and QoL were not significant, a significantly greater prostate volume, lower Qmax, and greater PVR were noted in the TUEB group. In perioperative parameters, a significantly shorter operation time, less change in serum hemoglobin, fewer days of catheterization, and shorter length of stay were observed in the PVP group. As for postoperative outcomes, the IPSS storage subscore and PVR were significantly improved in the TUEB group. As complications, stress urinary incontinence was more frequently observed in the TUEB group, and urethral stricture was more common in the PVP group.

Conclusion

The present data suggest that PVP and TUEB are efficient and safe surgical treatment options. Management of patients undergoing PVP in the perioperative period appears easy. Improvements of subjective and objective parameters were superior after TUEB than after PVP.

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.

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: efficacy, safety and preoperative management in patients presenting with anticoagulation therapy

PURPOSE

We evaluated efficacy and safety profile of patients with anticoagulation therapy (AT) undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP).

METHODS

Within our prospective institutional database (11/2017 to 11/2019), we analyzed functional outcomes and 30-day complication rates of HoLEP patients according to Clavien-Dindo classification (CLD), stratified according to specific AT vs. no AT. Further analyses consisted of uni- and multivariate logistic regression models (LRM) predicting complications.

RESULTS

Of 268 patients undergoing HoLEP, 104 (38.8%) received AT: 25.7% were treated with platelet aggregation inhibitors (PAI), 8.2% with new oral anticoagulants (NOAC) and 4.9% with AT-combinations or coumarins bridged with low molecular weight heparins (LMWH/combination). Patients receiving AT were significantly more comorbid (p < 0.01). Pre- and postoperative maximal flow rates, residual void urine and IPSS at 3 months after surgery were invariably improved after HoLEP for patients with/ without AT. Overall complication rate was 19.5% in patients with no AT vs. 26.1% vs. 27.3 vs. 46.2%, respectively, in patients with PAI, NOAC and LMWH/combination (p < 0.01). Major complications (CLD ≥ 3b) occurred in 6.1% of no AT patients vs. 4.3% vs. 4.5 vs. 0% in patients with PAI, NOAC and LMWH/combination, respectively (p < 0.01). In multivariate LRM, AT was not significantly associated with higher complication rates, whereas high ASA status (OR 2.2, p = 0.04), age (OR 1.04, p = 0.02) and bioptical or incidental prostate cancer (OR 2.5, p = 0.01) represented independent risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Despite higher overall complication rates in AT patients, major complications were not more frequent in AT patients. HoLEP is safe and effective in anticoagulated patients.

Holmium laser technologies versus photoselective greenlight vaporization for patients with benign prostatichyperplasia: a meta-analysis

This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of holmium laser technologies (HoL-Ts) and photoselective greenlight vaporization (PVP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and to perform a meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines on PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrial.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to August 2019. Functional outcomes, perioperative parameters, and complications were included and analyzed. Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) was used to perform all analyses. A total of six articles composed of 2014 patients were included in this review. In comparison with PVP, HoL-Ts had a better performance in 1-, 3-, and 6-month Qmax (P = 0.02, but I² = 81%), with less postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) (MD = -33.85, 95% CI -52.13 to -15.57, P = 0.0003) and less total energy used (MD = -31.66, 95% CI -58.99 to -4.33, P = 0.02). Moreover, HoL-Ts had a relatively lower risk of conversion rate (OR = 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.60, P = 0.01) associated with enough enucleation and less intraoperative bleeding. Subgroup analysis of holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP) versus PVP suggested that HoLEP presented better results in 1-, 3-, 6-month and 1-year Qmax with less PVR, less energy consumption, and lower conversion rate. Compared with PVP, HoL-Ts had higher 1-, 3-, and 6-month Qmax, less PVR, and less total energy consumption with a relatively lower risk of conversion rate. In subgroup analyses, HoLEP had shown better results in accordance with all HoL-Ts. Nevertheless, well-designed RCTs including overall functional indicators are required to confirm our findings.