PURPOSE: Thulium:YAG (Tm:YAG) VapoEnucleation has been introduced and relief of obstruction was demonstrated. The aim of this study was to proof durability of the outcomes in patients with an postoperative follow-up >12 month. METHODS: VapoEnucleation was performed using a 70 Watt continuous-wave-laser. After enucleation tissue was morcellated within the bladder. Patients were followed in terms of improvement of uroflow, intra- and postoperative course and for occurring complications. RESULTS: 88 consecutive patients with prostatic enlargement underwent our initial series of VapoEnucleation. Prostatic volume was 61.3 +/- 24.0 cc (30-160). OR-time was 72 min +/-26.6 (35-144) and laser-time 32.4 +/- 10.1 min (16.3-59.3). Applied laser energy was 123.7 +/- 40.6 kJ (67.8-240.9). Foley catheter-time was 2.1 +/- 1.06 days on average. In 79/88 patients the postoperative period extended 12 month (mean: 16.5 month). 2 patients deceased during the follow-up, 15 patients did not respond. Therefore, 62/77 patients were available for follow-up. Flow-rate and post-voiding residual urine improved significantly [3.5 vs. 23.3 ml/s (p < 0.001); 121.3 vs. 33.4 ml (p < 0.05)]. IPSS decreased from 18.4 to 6.8, QoL dropped from 4.6 to 1.4. Early complications were urinary tract infection (n: 6/6.8%), bleeding (n: 5/5.6%) and immediate re-treatment (n: 2/2.2%), as well as urethral stricture (n: 1/1.6%) during follow-up. Postoperative short-term dysuria was recorded in 27% of the patients. CONCLUSION: VapoEnucleation is a safe and effective minimal invasive treatment modality for BPO. The improvement in voiding and bother is durable in patients with a postoperative period extending 12 month.
PURPOSE: Thulium:YAG (Tm:YAG) VapoEnucleation has been introduced and relief of obstruction was demonstrated. The aim of this study was to proof durability of the outcomes in patients with an postoperative follow-up >12 month. METHODS: VapoEnucleation was performed using a 70 Watt continuous-wave-laser. After enucleation tissue was morcellated within the bladder. Patients were followed in terms of improvement of uroflow, intra- and postoperative course and for occurring complications. RESULTS: 88 consecutive patients with prostatic enlargement underwent our initial series of VapoEnucleation. Prostatic volume was 61.3 +/- 24.0 cc (30-160). OR-time was 72 min +/-26.6 (35-144) and laser-time 32.4 +/- 10.1 min (16.3-59.3). Applied laser energy was 123.7 +/- 40.6 kJ (67.8-240.9). Foley catheter-time was 2.1 +/- 1.06 days on average. In 79/88 patients the postoperative period extended 12 month (mean: 16.5 month). 2 patients deceased during the follow-up, 15 patients did not respond. Therefore, 62/77 patients were available for follow-up. Flow-rate and post-voiding residual urine improved significantly [3.5 vs. 23.3 ml/s (p < 0.001); 121.3 vs. 33.4 ml (p < 0.05)]. IPSS decreased from 18.4 to 6.8, QoL dropped from 4.6 to 1.4. Early complications were urinary tract infection (n: 6/6.8%), bleeding (n: 5/5.6%) and immediate re-treatment (n: 2/2.2%), as well as urethral stricture (n: 1/1.6%) during follow-up. Postoperative short-term dysuria was recorded in 27% of the patients. CONCLUSION: VapoEnucleation is a safe and effective minimal invasive treatment modality for BPO. The improvement in voiding and bother is durable in patients with a postoperative period extending 12 month.
Authors: Robin Ruszat; Stephen Wyler; Thomas Forster; Oliver Reich; Christian G Stief; Thomas C Gasser; Tullio Sulser; Alexander Bachmann Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2006-08-18 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jesco Pfitzenmaier; Christian Gilfrich; Maria Pritsch; Daniela Herrmann; Stephan Buse; Axel Haferkamp; Nenad Djakovic; Sascha Pahernik; Markus Hohenfellner Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-04-16 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Krishnamoorthy Rajbabu; Srinath K Chandrasekara; Neil J Barber; Kilian Walsh; Gordon H Muir Journal: BJU Int Date: 2007-05-19 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Richard Naspro; Alexander Bachmann; Peter Gilling; Rainer Kuntz; Stephan Madersbacher; Francesco Montorsi; Oliver Reich; Christian Stief; Ivano Vavassori Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2009-04-03 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Thorsten Bach; Thomas R W Herrmann; Roman Ganzer; Martin Burchardt; Andreas J Gross Journal: World J Urol Date: 2007-05-25 Impact factor: 3.661
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
Authors: Christopher Netsch; M Stoehrer; M Brüning; A Gabuev; T Bach; T R W Herrmann; A J Gross Journal: World J Urol Date: 2013-05-09 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: F M E Wagenlehner; Mete Cek; Kurt G Naber; Hiroshi Kiyota; Truls E Bjerklund-Johansen Journal: World J Urol Date: 2011-09-07 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Kang Sup Kim; Sae Woong Choi; Woong Jin Bae; Su Jin Kim; Hyuk Jin Cho; Sung-Hoo Hong; Ji Youl Lee; Tae-Kon Hwang; Sae Woong Kim Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 3.161