B Becker1, A J Gross2, C Netsch2. 1. Department of Urology, Asklepios Hospital Barmbek, Rübenkamp 220, 22291, Hamburg, Germany. ben.becker@asklepios.com. 2. Department of Urology, Asklepios Hospital Barmbek, Rübenkamp 220, 22291, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the 12-month outcomes of low-powered holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (LP-HoLEP) for patients with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). METHODS: A total of 54 patients with symptomatic BPO were treated with LP-HoLEP. All patients were treated by two experienced LP-HoLEP surgeons. A 50-W Ho:YAG laser was used at 39.6-W (2.2 J, 18 Hz). All patients were assessed preoperatively by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine (PVR), PSA, and whole prostate volume measurement by transrectal ultrasound. The patients were reassessed at 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. The complications were classified according to the modified Clavien classification system. Patient data were expressed as median (interquartile range) or numbers (%). RESULTS: The median age was 72.5 (67-77.25) years and the median preoperative prostate volume 74.5 (45-110) ml. 12 (22.2%) patients were treated with ongoing anticoagulant treatment. The median operative time was 65 (41-81) min and the enucleation efficiency 1.11 (0.82-1.79) g/min, respectively. Clavien 1 (11.1%), Clavien 2 (3.7%), Clavien 3a (3.7%), and Clavien 3b (5.5%) complications occurred. At 6-month follow-up, median prostate volume (74.5 vs. 15.5 ml) and PSA (4.03 vs. 0.54 µg/l) had improved significantly compared to baseline (p ≤ 0.009). At 12-month follow-up, Qmax (12 vs. 29.3 ml/s), PVR (155 vs. 11.15 ml), IPSS (22 vs. 6) and QoL (5 vs. 1) had improved significantly (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LP-HoLEP is technically feasible, safe and effective for the treatment of symptomatic BPO. For experienced surgeons, power is less relevant than technique.
PURPOSE: To analyze the 12-month outcomes of low-powered holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (LP-HoLEP) for patients with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). METHODS: A total of 54 patients with symptomatic BPO were treated with LP-HoLEP. All patients were treated by two experienced LP-HoLEP surgeons. A 50-W Ho:YAG laser was used at 39.6-W (2.2 J, 18 Hz). All patients were assessed preoperatively by International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine (PVR), PSA, and whole prostate volume measurement by transrectal ultrasound. The patients were reassessed at 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. The complications were classified according to the modified Clavien classification system. Patient data were expressed as median (interquartile range) or numbers (%). RESULTS: The median age was 72.5 (67-77.25) years and the median preoperative prostate volume 74.5 (45-110) ml. 12 (22.2%) patients were treated with ongoing anticoagulant treatment. The median operative time was 65 (41-81) min and the enucleation efficiency 1.11 (0.82-1.79) g/min, respectively. Clavien 1 (11.1%), Clavien 2 (3.7%), Clavien 3a (3.7%), and Clavien 3b (5.5%) complications occurred. At 6-month follow-up, median prostate volume (74.5 vs. 15.5 ml) and PSA (4.03 vs. 0.54 µg/l) had improved significantly compared to baseline (p ≤ 0.009). At 12-month follow-up, Qmax (12 vs. 29.3 ml/s), PVR (155 vs. 11.15 ml), IPSS (22 vs. 6) and QoL (5 vs. 1) had improved significantly (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:LP-HoLEP is technically feasible, safe and effective for the treatment of symptomatic BPO. For experienced surgeons, power is less relevant than technique.
Authors: Peter J Gilling; Liam C Wilson; Colleen J King; Andre M Westenberg; Christopher M Frampton; Mark R Fraundorfer Journal: BJU Int Date: 2011-08-23 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Richard Naspro; Fernando Gomez Sancha; Michele Manica; Agostino Meneghini; Sascha Ahyai; Tevita Aho; Cristian Fiori; Ivano Vavassori; Luigi F DA Pozzo; Vito Pansadoro; Francesco Montorsi; Thomas R Herrmann Journal: Minerva Urol Nefrol Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 3.720
Authors: Ahmed M Elshal; Hossam Nabeeh; Yasser Eldemerdash; Ramy Mekkawy; Mahmoud Laymon; Ahmed El-Assmy; Ahmed R El-Nahas Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-11-05 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Richard Naspro; Nazareno Suardi; Andrea Salonia; Vincenzo Scattoni; Giorgio Guazzoni; Renzo Colombo; Andrea Cestari; Alberto Briganti; Bruno Mazzoccoli; Patrizio Rigatti; Francesco Montorsi Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2006-05-02 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Sascha A Ahyai; Peter Gilling; Steven A Kaplan; Rainer M Kuntz; Stephan Madersbacher; Francesco Montorsi; Mark J Speakman; Christian G Stief Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-06-11 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Michael W Dusing; Amy E Krambeck; Colin Terry; Brian R Matlaga; Nicole L Miller; Mitchell R Humphreys; Ehud Gnessin; James E Lingeman Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-06-19 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jean-Nicolas Cornu; Sascha Ahyai; Alexander Bachmann; Jean de la Rosette; Peter Gilling; Christian Gratzke; Kevin McVary; Giacomo Novara; Henry Woo; Stephan Madersbacher Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-06-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Ramsay L Kuo; Samuel C Kim; James E Lingeman; Ryan F Paterson; Stephanie L Watkins; Garrick R Simmons; Ronald E Steele Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Giacomo Maria Pirola; Daniele Castellani; Martina Maggi; Ee Jean Lim; Vinson Wai Shun Chan; Angelo Naselli; Jeremy Yuen Chun Teoh; Vineet Gauhar Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2022-06-22
Authors: Giorgio Bozzini; Matteo Maltagliati; Umberto Besana; Lorenzo Berti; Albert Calori; Maria Chiara Sighinolfi; Salvatore Micali; Jean Baptiste Roche; Ali Gozen; Alexander Mueller; Dimitry Pushkar; Evangelos Liatsikos; Marco Boldini; Carlo Buizza; Bernardo Rocco Journal: BMC Urol Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 2.264