OBJECTIVE: We compared the surgical results between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TUR-P) for the treatment of men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: A total of 87 patients with symptomatic BPH were analysed. HoLEP was performed on 46 men (mean age 68.2 +/- 7.5 years old) from December 2005 to February 2007, and TUR-P was performed on 41 men (mean age 69.2 +/- 7.3 years old) from April 2004 to March 2006. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable in terms of age, pre-operative IPSS, QOL index, urodynamic study results and prostate volume. During operation, decrease in hemoglobin was less in the HoLEP group than in the TUR-P group (1.15 +/- 1.2 vs 1.91 +/- 1.3 g/dl p < 0.05). The operation time was significantly longer in the HoLEP group than in the TUR-P group (161.9 +/- 65.0 vs. 118.3 +/- 36.9 minutes p < 0.001). Mean resected weight was 29.3 +/- 13.3 g (10-55) in the TUR-P group and 34.8 +/- 33.4 g (5-148) in the HoLEP group (p = 0.337). The catheterization period (52.1 +/- 29.6 vs. 115.2 +/- 27.5 hour p < 0.001) and hospital stay (6.6 +/- 2.3 vs. 9.4 +/- 2.2 days p < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the HoLEP group than in the TUR-P group. At follow up, Qmax, average flow rate and post void residual urine (PVR) in two groups improved significantly, and these parameters were not significantly different between the groups after 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Both TUR-P and HoLEP were effective in relieving BOO. The estimated blood loss, a catheterization time and hospitalization were less or shorter in the HoLEP group. HoLEP may be a good alternative to the conventional transurethral electrocautery resection of the prostate for symptomatic BPH.
OBJECTIVE: We compared the surgical results between holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TUR-P) for the treatment of men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: A total of 87 patients with symptomatic BPH were analysed. HoLEP was performed on 46 men (mean age 68.2 +/- 7.5 years old) from December 2005 to February 2007, and TUR-P was performed on 41 men (mean age 69.2 +/- 7.3 years old) from April 2004 to March 2006. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable in terms of age, pre-operative IPSS, QOL index, urodynamic study results and prostate volume. During operation, decrease in hemoglobin was less in the HoLEP group than in the TUR-P group (1.15 +/- 1.2 vs 1.91 +/- 1.3 g/dl p < 0.05). The operation time was significantly longer in the HoLEP group than in the TUR-P group (161.9 +/- 65.0 vs. 118.3 +/- 36.9 minutes p < 0.001). Mean resected weight was 29.3 +/- 13.3 g (10-55) in the TUR-P group and 34.8 +/- 33.4 g (5-148) in the HoLEP group (p = 0.337). The catheterization period (52.1 +/- 29.6 vs. 115.2 +/- 27.5 hour p < 0.001) and hospital stay (6.6 +/- 2.3 vs. 9.4 +/- 2.2 days p < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the HoLEP group than in the TUR-P group. At follow up, Qmax, average flow rate and post void residual urine (PVR) in two groups improved significantly, and these parameters were not significantly different between the groups after 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Both TUR-P and HoLEP were effective in relieving BOO. The estimated blood loss, a catheterization time and hospitalization were less or shorter in the HoLEP group. HoLEP may be a good alternative to the conventional transurethral electrocautery resection of the prostate for symptomatic BPH.