5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Holmium laser transurethral resection of bladder tumor: Our experience

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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

          Purpose:

          To compare the safety and efficiency of conventional monopolar and holmium laser en bloc transurethral resection of bladder tumor (CM-TURBT and HoL-EBRBT) while managing primary nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer.

          Materials and Methods:

          From January 2012 to October 2015, fifty patients with primary nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer underwent endoscopic surgery. Among them, 27 patients underwent CM-TURBT and 23 patients underwent HoL-EBRBT. Clinical data, included preoperative, operative, and postoperative management and follow-up, were recorded.

          Results:

          Patient demographics and tumor characteristics in both groups were compared before surgery. There was no significant difference in operative duration among the groups. Compared with the CM-TURBT group, HoL-EBRBT group had less intraoperative and postoperative complications, including obturator nerve reflex ( P < 0.01), bladder perforation ( P < 0.01), as well as bleeding and postoperative bladder irritation ( P < 0.01). There were no significant differences among the two groups in the transfusion rate and occurrence of urethral strictures. Patients in the HoL-EBRBT group had less catheterization and hospitalization time than those in the CM-TURBT group ( P < 0.01), and there were no significant differences in each risk subgroup as well as the overall recurrence rate among the CM-TURBT and HoL-EBRBT groups.

          Conclusions:

          HoL-EBRBT might prove to be preferable alternatives to CM-TURBT management of nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer. HoL-EBRBT however did not demonstrate an obvious advantage over CM-TURBT in tumor recurrence rate.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          EAU guidelines on laser technologies.

          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 © 2012 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Critical review of lasers in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

            • Laser treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia has challenged transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to advances in laser technology, better understanding of tissue-laser interactions and growing clinical experience. • Various lasers have been introduced including neodymium: yttrium aluminium garnet (YAG), holmium (Ho):YAG, potassium titanyl phosphate:YAG, thulium(Tm) and diode laser. Based on the different wave-length dependent laser-prostatic tissue interactions, the main techniques are coagulation, vaporization, resection and enucleation. • The present review aims to help urologists to distinguish and to critically evaluate the role of different laser methods in the treatment by using an evidence-based approach. It also details further evidence for use in specific patient groups (in retention, on anticoagulation) and addresses the issues of cost and learning curve. • Coagulation-based techniques have been abandoned; holmium ablation/resection of the prostate has been superseded by the enucleation technique Ho-laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). The short-term efficacy of the emerging laser treatments such as diode and Tm prostatectomy has been suggested by low quality studies. HoLEP and photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) represent valid clinical alternatives to TURP. HoLEP is the most rigorously analysed laser technique with durable efficacy for any prostate size and low early and late morbidity. PVP has grown in acceptance and popularity but long-term results from high quality studies are pending. © 2010 THE AUTHORS; BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2010 BJU INTERNATIONAL.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Technological advances in transurethral resection of the prostate: bipolar versus monopolar TURP.

               Muta Issa (2008)
              One of the most significant recent advancements in transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the incorporation of bipolar technology. Bipolar circuitry allows TURP to be performed in a normal saline environment, which addresses a fundamental concern of conventional monopolar TURP (i.e., the use of hypo-osmolar irrigation). As a result, the risks of dilutional hyponatremia and transurethral resection (TUR) syndrome are eliminated, allowing for longer and safer resection. This review discusses the principles and applications of electrosurgery in conventional monopolar as well as new bipolar saline-based TURP systems. This review also addresses the positive impact on patient safety and resident training.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Urol Ann
                Urol Ann
                UA
                Urology Annals
                Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd (India )
                0974-7796
                0974-7834
                Oct-Dec 2016
                : 8
                : 4
                : 439-443
                Affiliations
                Department of Urology, Yenepoya Medical College and Hospital, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
                Author notes
                Address for correspondence: Dr. Nischith D’souza, Department of Urology, Yenepoya Medical College and Hospital, Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India. E-mail: nish25@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                UA-8-439
                10.4103/0974-7796.190815
                5100149
                Copyright: © Urology Annals

                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.

                Categories
                Original Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article