BACKGROUND: High-level evidence to support the use of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) is limited. OBJECTIVE: Assess the efficacy and safety of GreenLight HPS 120-W laser PVP compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized clinical trial was performed with 50 patients having lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia in each treatment arm. INTERVENTION: Random allocation to PVP or TURP. MEASUREMENTS: International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), and changes in maximum flow rate (Qmax) were the main end points. Patients were evaluated at a follow-up time of 2 yr. Five patients were lost to follow-up. A last observation carried forward analysis was done. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Both laser PVP and TURP resulted in the same IPPS reduction at 2 yr (-15.7 and -14.9, respectively; p=0.48) and in the same gain in Qmax (+14.5 ml/s and +13.1 ml/s, respectively; p=0.65). QoL was equivalent for both treatment modalities. These results were independent of prostate size, American Society of Anesthesiologists risk category, and prior indwelling catheter. No statistically significant differences were detected between arms in terms of complication rates. In the laser PVP group, three patients were readmitted to the hospital and two developed a urethral stricture. In the TURP group, two patients were readmitted, six developed a urethral stricture, and two developed bladder neck sclerosis. In-hospital stay and time to catheter removal were significantly shorter with PVP. Limitations are the potential lack of power to detect differences in the complications between groups and the lack of blindness due to the nature of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS:GreenLight HPS 120-W laser PVP is as effective as TURP for symptom reduction and improvement of QoL. No differences were seen in the response of storage and voiding symptoms. Laser PVP and TURP have the same complication rate. Length of stay is shorter for laser PVP group.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: High-level evidence to support the use of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) is limited. OBJECTIVE: Assess the efficacy and safety of GreenLight HPS 120-W laser PVP compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized clinical trial was performed with 50 patients having lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia in each treatment arm. INTERVENTION: Random allocation to PVP or TURP. MEASUREMENTS: International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), and changes in maximum flow rate (Qmax) were the main end points. Patients were evaluated at a follow-up time of 2 yr. Five patients were lost to follow-up. A last observation carried forward analysis was done. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Both laser PVP and TURP resulted in the same IPPS reduction at 2 yr (-15.7 and -14.9, respectively; p=0.48) and in the same gain in Qmax (+14.5 ml/s and +13.1 ml/s, respectively; p=0.65). QoL was equivalent for both treatment modalities. These results were independent of prostate size, American Society of Anesthesiologists risk category, and prior indwelling catheter. No statistically significant differences were detected between arms in terms of complication rates. In the laser PVP group, three patients were readmitted to the hospital and two developed a urethral stricture. In the TURP group, two patients were readmitted, six developed a urethral stricture, and two developed bladder neck sclerosis. In-hospital stay and time to catheter removal were significantly shorter with PVP. Limitations are the potential lack of power to detect differences in the complications between groups and the lack of blindness due to the nature of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: GreenLight HPS 120-W laser PVP is as effective as TURP for symptom reduction and improvement of QoL. No differences were seen in the response of storage and voiding symptoms. Laser PVP and TURP have the same complication rate. Length of stay is shorter for laser PVP group.
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