BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We present our clinical experiences of two recently introduced vaporization laser systems: the GreenLight High Performance System (HPS) laser (532 nm, 120 W) and the Diolas LFDdiode laser (980 nm, 200 W). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two laser systems were evaluated to compare their clinical results for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Patients were treated using either the GreenLight HPS laser (n = 84) or the diode laser (n = 55) in a prospective randomized study. The data of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Q(max)), post-void residual urine (PVR), and quality of life score (Qols) were recorded at baseline, 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. The prostate volume and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level were assessed at baseline and 6-month follow-up. All complications were also recorded. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference in IPSS, Q(max), PVR, and QoLs in each laser group at the 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups compared with baseline. There was no statistical significant difference in any of these parameters at any follow-up interval between each group. The diode laser demonstrates superior hemostatic properties compared with the GreenLight HPS laser. Postoperative incontinence and postoperative irritative symptoms are more pronounced (P < 0.05) after diode laser prostatectomy. Higher incidence of dysuria with sloughing tissues and epididymitis (P < 0.05) is noted after diode laser prostatectomy. Other complications were comparable for both procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Although both lasers can improve subjective and objective parameters of BPH, both can produce undesired effects. The search for the ideal vaporization laser to treat BPH still continues. 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We present our clinical experiences of two recently introduced vaporization laser systems: the GreenLight High Performance System (HPS) laser (532 nm, 120 W) and the Diolas LFD diode laser (980 nm, 200 W). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two laser systems were evaluated to compare their clinical results for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Patients were treated using either the GreenLight HPS laser (n = 84) or the diode laser (n = 55) in a prospective randomized study. The data of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Q(max)), post-void residual urine (PVR), and quality of life score (Qols) were recorded at baseline, 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. The prostate volume and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level were assessed at baseline and 6-month follow-up. All complications were also recorded. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference in IPSS, Q(max), PVR, and QoLs in each laser group at the 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups compared with baseline. There was no statistical significant difference in any of these parameters at any follow-up interval between each group. The diode laser demonstrates superior hemostatic properties compared with the GreenLight HPS laser. Postoperative incontinence and postoperative irritative symptoms are more pronounced (P < 0.05) after diode laser prostatectomy. Higher incidence of dysuria with sloughing tissues and epididymitis (P < 0.05) is noted after diode laser prostatectomy. Other complications were comparable for both procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Although both lasers can improve subjective and objective parameters of BPH, both can produce undesired effects. The search for the ideal vaporization laser to treat BPH still continues. 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
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: Lukas Lusuardi; Michael Mitterberger; Stephan Hruby; Thomas Kunit; Birgit Kloss; Paul F Engelhardt; Manuela Sieberer; Günter Janetschek Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-05-24 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: J Curtis Nickel; Lorne Aaron; Jack Barkin; Dean Elterman; Mahmoud Nachabé; Kevin C Zorn Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 1.862