Efficacy and Safety of 120-W Thulium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet Vapoenucleation of Prostates Compared with Holmium Laser Enucleation of Prostates for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background:

This study compared the efficacy and safety between 120-W thulium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Tm:YAG) vapoenucleation of prostates (ThuVEP) and holmium laser enucleation of prostates (HoLEP) for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

Methods:

A retrospective analysis of 88 consecutive patients with symptomatic BPH was carried out, who underwent either 120-W ThuVEP or HoLEP nonrandomly. Patient demographics and peri-operative and 12-month follow-up data were analyzed with the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) score, maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), and rates of peri-operative and late complications.

Results:

The patients in each group showed no significant difference in preoperative parameters. Compared with the HoLEP group, patients in the 120-W ThuVEP group required significantly shorter time for laser enucleation (58.3 ± 12.8 min vs. 70.5 ± 22.3 min, P = 0.003), and resulted in a significant superiority in laser efficiency (resected prostate weight/laser enucleation time) for 120-W Tm:YAG laser compared to holmium:YAG laser (0.69 ± 0.18 vs. 0.61 ± 0.19, P = 0.048). During 1, 6, and 12 months of follow-ups, the procedures did not demonstrate a significant difference in IPSS, QoL score, Qmax, or PVR ( P > 0.05). Mean peri-operative decrease of hemoglobin in the HoLEP group was similar to the ThuVEP group (17.1 ± 12.0 g/L vs. 15.2 ± 10.1 g/L, P = 0.415). Early and late incidences of complications were low and did not differ significantly between the two groups of 120-W ThuVEP and HoLEP patients ( P > 0.05).

Conclusions:

120-W ThuVEP and HoLEP are potent, safe and efficient modalities of minimally invasive surgeries for patients with LUTS due to BPH. Compared with HoLEP, 120-W ThuVEP offers advantages of reduction of laser enucleation time and improvement of laser efficiency.

Related collections

Most cited references 24

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate: results at 7 years.

Christopher M A Frampton, C. A. M. E. Wilson, M. King … (2012)

To assess the durability of holmium laser enucleation of prostate in comparison to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Patients were enrolled in the present study between June 1997 and December 2000 and followed per protocol. All patients were urodynamically obstructed with a prostate volume of between 40 and 200 mL. At long-term follow-up, variables assessed included Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Impact Index (BPHII), International Continence Society Short Form Male questionnaire (ICSmale-SF) and the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). Adverse events, including the need for retreatment, were specifically assessed. Thirty-one (14 holmium laser enucleation of the prostate [HoLEP] and 17 TURP) of the initial 61 patients were available, with 12 deceased and 18 lost to follow-up. The mean (range) follow-up was 7.6 (5.9-10.0) years and the mean (±sd) age at follow-up was 79.8 (±6.2) years. The mean (±sd) values (HoLEP vs TURP) were as follows: maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)), 22.09 ± 15.47 vs 17.83 ± 8.61 mL/s; American Urological Association (AUA) symptom score, 8.0 ± 5.2 vs 10.3 ± 7.42; quality of life (QOL) score 1.47 ± 1.31 vs 1.31 ± 0.85; BPHII, 1.53 ± 2.9 vs 0.58 ± 0.79; IIEF-EF (erectile function), 11.6 ± 7.46 vs 9.21 ± 7.17; ICSmale Voiding Score (VS), 4.2 ± 3.76 vs 3.0 ± 2.41; ICSmale Incontinence Score (IS), 3.07 ± 3.3 vs 1.17 ± 1.4. There were no significant differences in any variable between the two groups beyond the first year. Of the assessable patients, none required re-operation for recurrent BPH in the HoLEP arm and three (of 17) required re-operation in the TURP arm . The results of this randomized trial confirm that HoLEP is at least equivalent to TURP in the long term with fewer re-operations being necessary. © 2011 THE AUTHORS. BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

0 comments Cited 74 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

EAU guidelines on laser technologies.

Thomas Herrmann, Evangelos N. Liatsikos, Udo Nagele … (2012)

The European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines Office has set up a guideline working panel to analyse the scientific evidence published in the world literature on lasers in urologic practice. Review the physical background and physiologic and technical aspects of the use of lasers in urology, as well as current clinical results from these new and evolving technologies, together with recommendations for the application of lasers in urology. The primary objective of this structured presentation of the current evidence base in this area is to assist clinicians in making informed choices regarding the use of lasers in their practice. Structured literature searches using an expert consultant were designed for each section of this document. Searches were carried out in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Medline and Embase on the Dialog/DataStar platform. The controlled terminology of the respective databases was used, and both Medical Subject Headings and EMTREE were analysed for relevant entry terms. One Cochrane review was identified. Depending on the date of publication, the evidence for different laser treatments is heterogeneous. The available evidence allows treatments to be classified as safe alternatives for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction in different clinical scenarios, such as refractory urinary retention, anticoagulation, and antiplatelet medication. Laser treatment for bladder cancer should only be used in a clinical trial setting or for patients who are not suitable for conventional treatment due to comorbidities or other complications. For the treatment of urinary stones and retrograde endoureterotomy, lasers provide a standard tool to augment the endourologic procedure. In benign prostatic obstruction (BPO), laser vaporisation, resection, or enucleation are alternative treatment options. The standard treatment for BPO remains transurethral resection of the prostate for small to moderate size prostates and open prostatectomy for large prostates. Laser energy is an optimal treatment method for disintegrating urinary stones. The use of lasers to treat bladder tumours and in laparoscopy remains investigational. Copyright Â© 2012 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 44 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Thulium laser versus holmium laser transurethral enucleation of the prostate: 18-month follow-up data of a single center.

Fengbo Zhang, Qiang Shao, Thomas R W Herrmann … (2012)

To compare the clinical outcomes between thulium laser transurethral enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) (70 W) and holmium laser transurethral enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) (90 W) in a prospective randomized trial with 18 months of follow-up. Both ThuLEP and HoLEP effectively relieve the obstructive symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A total of 133 consecutive patients with BPH were randomized to either ThuLEP (n = 71) or HoLEP (n = 62). An energy setting of 70 W and 90 W was used for the thulium and holmium laser in the enucleation procedure, respectively. The mushroom technique was used to fragment the enucleated lobes with the resection loop. The preoperative and postoperative parameters were compared. ThuLEP required a longer operation time (72.4 vs 61.5 minutes, P = .034) but resulted in less blood loss than HoLEP (130.0 vs 166.6 mL, P = .045). The catheterization time was comparable. At 18 months, the lower urinary tract symptom indexes were improved significantly in both groups compared with the baseline values. The International Prostate Symptom Score decreased to 5.2 in the ThuLEP group and 6.2 in the HoLEP group. The quality of life score and peak urinary flow rate were similar between the 2 groups (1.3 vs 1.2 and 23.4 vs 24.2 mL/s) and the postvoid residual urine volume decreased by 82.50% and 81.73% in the ThuLEP and HoLEP groups, respectively. The mean prostate-specific antigen decrease after HoLEP and ThuLEP was 30.43% and 43.36%, respectively. No urethral or bladder neck stricture were found in either group. Both ThuLEP (70 W) and HoLEP (90 W) relieve lower urinary tract symptoms equally with high efficacy and safety. ThuLEP was statistically superior to HoLEP in blood loss and inferior to HoLEP in operation time, although the differences were clinically negligible. The mushroom technique could be adequate, without an additional mechanical tissue morcellator. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 43 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Chin Med J (Engl)

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Chin. Med. J

Journal ID (publisher-id): CMJ

Title: Chinese Medical Journal

Publisher: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd (India )

ISSN (Print): 0366-6999

Publication date (Print): 05 April 2015

Volume: 128

Issue: 7

Pages: 884-889

Affiliations

[1]Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China

Author notes

Address for correspondence: Dr. Yu-Qing Liu, Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China E-mail: pku3uro@ 123456aliyun.com

Article

Publisher ID: CMJ-128-884

DOI: 10.4103/0366-6999.154282

PMC ID: 4834003

PubMed ID: 25836607

SO-VID: 2c735234-1ce9-42ff-8ddf-e47045439b00

License:

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Efficacy and Safety of 120-W Thulium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet Vapoenucleation of Prostates Compared with Holmium Laser Enucleation of Prostates for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Read this article at

Abstract

Background:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusions:

Related collections

Efficacy of Communicating Science

Most cited references 24

Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate: results at 7 years.

EAU guidelines on laser technologies.

Thulium laser versus holmium laser transurethral enucleation of the prostate: 18-month follow-up data of a single center.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 139

Cited by 10

Most referenced authors 208