Literature DB >> 10532976

Hybrid laser treatment compared with transurethral resection of the prostate for symptomatic bladder outlet obstruction caused by a large benign prostate: a prospective, randomized trial with a 6-month follow-up.

K Tuhkanen1, A Heino, M Alaopas.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of hybrid laser treatment, i.e. the combination of visual Nd-YAG laser ablation of prostate and contact Nd-YAG laser vaporization of prostate, with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the treatment of patients with symptomatic bladder outlet obstruction secondary to a benign high-volume prostate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-five symptomatic patients with hyperplastic prostates of >40 mL were randomized to undergo either hybrid laser treatment (21) or TURP (24). All patients were evaluated before and after treatment with a complex urodynamic assessment, and were accepted into the study only if they had infravesical obstruction in the pressure-flow study. In the hybrid method, Nd-YAG laser energy was first delivered by an 'adenoma-dependent' approach to all areas of the obstructing lateral lobe tissue through a side-firing gold-alloy tip fibre at 40 W for 90 s of 'burn'. The prostatic urethra was then opened and the median lobe vaporized using the a contact probe at 40 W. Patients were re-evaluated 3 and 6 months after treatment.
RESULTS: Both treatments proved to be safe, and improved the subjective and objective outcome measures at 3 and 6 months compared with baseline values. After 3 months, there was a greater improvement in the TURP group in peak urinary flow rate (Qmax; P<0.01), mean urinary flow rate (Qave; P<0.01) and postvoid residual urine volume (P<0.05) than in the hybrid laser group. After 6 months, there was a greater improvement in the TURP group in detrusor pressure at Qmax (P<0.01), Qave (P<0.05) and prostate size (P<0.001) than in the hybrid laser group. In the pressure-flow study at 6 months, a higher proportion of patients (seven of 19) were still obstructed in the hybrid laser group than in TURP group (two of 21; P<0.05). TURP caused more intraoperative blood loss (P<0.001) and postoperative problems associated with bleeding; 38% of hybrid laser patients were discharged with a suprapubic catheter, whereas all TURP patients could urinate at discharge (P<0.01). The duration of bladder drainage was longer after hybrid laser treatment (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: The hybrid laser method was a safe but less effective treatment than TURP for benign prostatic enlargement in patients with prostates of >40 mL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10532976     DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00316.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  6 in total

1.  [S2e guideline of the German urologists: Instrumental treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia].

Authors:  T Bschleipfer; T Bach; R Berges; K Dreikorn; C Gratzke; S Madersbacher; M-S Michel; R Muschter; M Oelke; O Reich; C Tschuschke; K Höfner
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  Changing therapeutic regimens in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clinical and economic considerations.

Authors:  H J Stoevelaar; J McDonnell
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  [The 80 W potassium-titanium-phosphate (KTP) laser vaporization of the prostate. Technique and 6 month follow-up after 70 procedures].

Authors:  A Bachmann; O Reich; St Wyler; R Ruszat; R Casella; T Gasser; A Hofstetter; T Sulser
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  The use of lasers in benign prostatic enlargement.

Authors:  T A McNicholas; S Singh
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 5.  Lasers for median lobe hyperplasia.

Authors:  R Muschter; A P Gilling
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.862

6.  Different lasers in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xingming Zhang; Pengfei Shen; Qiying He; Xiaoxue Yin; Zhibin Chen; Haojun Gui; Kunpeng Shu; Qidun Tang; Yaojing Yang; Xiuyi Pan; Jia Wang; Ni Chen; Hao Zeng
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.