OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety, efficacy and durability of neodymium (Nd):YAG laser prostatectomy with transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP) for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From March 1995 to March 1997, 180 patients with bladder outlet obstruction secondary to BPH were randomized equally either to Nd:YAG laser therapy or TUVP. Laser therapy combined two different techniques, side-fire coagulation of the lateral lobes and contact vaporization of the median lobe. Before treatment the two groups had a comparable International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality-of-life score (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), and prostate and adenoma volume. In all, 62 and 78 patients completed the 1, 2, 3 and 4-year follow-up from the laser and TUVP groups, respectively. RESULTS: At each follow-up, the IPSS, QoL, Qmax and PVR were significantly better and more durable in the TUVP than in the laser group. In the TUVP and laser groups respectively, at the 4-year follow-up the mean value of the IPSS was 3.7 vs 11.9, the QoL 1.3 vs 3.1, the Qmax 21.4 vs 13.6 mL/s and the PVR 25.1 vs 64.6 mL (all P < 0.001). The mean prostate and adenoma volume were significantly lower after TUVP than after laser therapy (P < 0.001) at the 1- and 4-year follow-up, with final values of 27.9 vs 35.9 and 11.7 vs 20 mL (both P < 0.001) for the TUVP and laser groups, respectively. Retrograde ejaculation was significantly more common after TUVP (63%) than after laser therapy (18%; P < 0.001). Impotence was reported in 8% of men after TUVP and in none after laser therapy (P = 0.040). The re-operation rate was 12% after TUVP and 38% after laser treatment (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These 4-year follow-up results confirm that TUVP is significantly more effective and durable than the Nd:YAG laser for treating BPH. Residual obstructing adenoma was the main cause of failure in the laser group, which reflects the inadequacy of laser therapy for removing the adenoma.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety, efficacy and durability of neodymium (Nd):YAG laser prostatectomy with transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP) for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From March 1995 to March 1997, 180 patients with bladder outlet obstruction secondary to BPH were randomized equally either to Nd:YAG laser therapy or TUVP. Laser therapy combined two different techniques, side-fire coagulation of the lateral lobes and contact vaporization of the median lobe. Before treatment the two groups had a comparable International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality-of-life score (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), and prostate and adenoma volume. In all, 62 and 78 patients completed the 1, 2, 3 and 4-year follow-up from the laser and TUVP groups, respectively. RESULTS: At each follow-up, the IPSS, QoL, Qmax and PVR were significantly better and more durable in the TUVP than in the laser group. In the TUVP and laser groups respectively, at the 4-year follow-up the mean value of the IPSS was 3.7 vs 11.9, the QoL 1.3 vs 3.1, the Qmax 21.4 vs 13.6 mL/s and the PVR 25.1 vs 64.6 mL (all P < 0.001). The mean prostate and adenoma volume were significantly lower after TUVP than after laser therapy (P < 0.001) at the 1- and 4-year follow-up, with final values of 27.9 vs 35.9 and 11.7 vs 20 mL (both P < 0.001) for the TUVP and laser groups, respectively. Retrograde ejaculation was significantly more common after TUVP (63%) than after laser therapy (18%; P < 0.001). Impotence was reported in 8% of men after TUVP and in none after laser therapy (P = 0.040). The re-operation rate was 12% after TUVP and 38% after laser treatment (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These 4-year follow-up results confirm that TUVP is significantly more effective and durable than the Nd:YAG laser for treating BPH. Residual obstructing adenoma was the main cause of failure in the laser group, which reflects the inadequacy of laser therapy for removing the adenoma.