PURPOSE: This study sought to compare perioperative outcomes and morbidities for open simple prostatectomy (OSP) and endoscopic green laser enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP). METHODS: In a single department, all consecutive patients who underwent OSP between January 2005 and December 2010 were retrospectively reviewed, and all consecutive patients undergoing GreenLEP between July 2013 and January 2017 were prospectively enrolled. Perioperative data, information regarding early postoperative complications for up to 6 months and outcomes were collected and retrospectively compared. RESULTS: Overall, 204 patients were enrolled in each group. The baseline characteristics of patients in both groups were comparable. Intraoperative time was significantly longer for the OSP group than for the GreenLEP group (67 versus 60 min; p < 0.0001). The OSP group had significantly longer catheterisation (5 versus 2 days; p < 0.0001) and hospitalisation times (7 versus 2 days; p < 0.0001) than the GreenLEP group. The overall rate of complications was significantly higher after OSP than after GreenLEP (37.2 versus 20.6%; p = 0.0003); both Clavien-Dindo grade 3a complications (8.8 versus 0.98%) and Clavien-Dindo grade 3b complications (2.4 versus 3.4%) were observed. The transfusion rate was higher after OSP than after GreenLEP (8.3 versus 0.5%; p = 0.0001). The rehospitalisation rate was similar for both groups (7.8 versus 8.3%; p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this single-centre cohort study confirm those of similar prior investigations addressing endoscopic enucleation of the prostate. Compared with OSP, GreenLEP may have a more desirable perioperative profile with lower morbidity. In contrast, GreenLEP and OSP were associated with similar 6-month rehospitalisation rates.
PURPOSE: This study sought to compare perioperative outcomes and morbidities for open simple prostatectomy (OSP) and endoscopic green laser enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP). METHODS: In a single department, all consecutive patients who underwent OSP between January 2005 and December 2010 were retrospectively reviewed, and all consecutive patients undergoing GreenLEP between July 2013 and January 2017 were prospectively enrolled. Perioperative data, information regarding early postoperative complications for up to 6 months and outcomes were collected and retrospectively compared. RESULTS: Overall, 204 patients were enrolled in each group. The baseline characteristics of patients in both groups were comparable. Intraoperative time was significantly longer for the OSP group than for the GreenLEP group (67 versus 60 min; p < 0.0001). The OSP group had significantly longer catheterisation (5 versus 2 days; p < 0.0001) and hospitalisation times (7 versus 2 days; p < 0.0001) than the GreenLEP group. The overall rate of complications was significantly higher after OSP than after GreenLEP (37.2 versus 20.6%; p = 0.0003); both Clavien-Dindo grade 3a complications (8.8 versus 0.98%) and Clavien-Dindo grade 3b complications (2.4 versus 3.4%) were observed. The transfusion rate was higher after OSP than after GreenLEP (8.3 versus 0.5%; p = 0.0001). The rehospitalisation rate was similar for both groups (7.8 versus 8.3%; p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this single-centre cohort study confirm those of similar prior investigations addressing endoscopic enucleation of the prostate. Compared with OSP, GreenLEP may have a more desirable perioperative profile with lower morbidity. In contrast, GreenLEP and OSP were associated with similar 6-month rehospitalisation rates.
Authors: Ahmed M Elshal; Mohamed A Elkoushy; Ahmed R El-Nahas; Ahmed M Shoma; Adel Nabeeh; Serge Carrier; Mostafa M Elhilali Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-09-28 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Vincent Misraï; Matthieu Faron; Julien Guillotreau; Eric Bruguière; Benoit Bordier; Shahrokh F Shariat; Morgan Rouprêt Journal: World J Urol Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 4.226
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: Riccardo Autorino; Homayoun Zargar; Mirandolino B Mariano; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; René J Sotelo; Piotr L Chlosta; Octavio Castillo; Deliu V Matei; Antonio Celia; Gokhan Koc; Anup Vora; Monish Aron; J Kellogg Parsons; Giovannalberto Pini; James C Jensen; Douglas Sutherland; Xavier Cathelineau; Luciano A Nuñez Bragayrac; Ioannis M Varkarakis; Daniele Amparore; Matteo Ferro; Gaetano Gallo; Alessandro Volpe; Hakan Vuruskan; Gaurav Bandi; Jonathan Hwang; Josh Nething; Nic Muruve; Sameer Chopra; Nishant D Patel; Ithaar Derweesh; David Champ Weeks; Ryan Spier; Keith Kowalczyk; John Lynch; Andrew Harbin; Mohan Verghese; Srinivas Samavedi; Wilson R Molina; Emanuel Dias; Youness Ahallal; Humberto Laydner; Edward Cherullo; Ottavio De Cobelli; David D Thiel; Mikael Lagerkvist; Georges-Pascal Haber; Jihad Kaouk; Fernando J Kim; Estevao Lima; Vipul Patel; Wesley White; Alexander Mottrie; Francesco Porpiglia Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-12-04 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Kevin C Zorn; S Larry Goldenberg; Ryan Paterson; Alan So; Dean Elterman; Naeem Bhojani Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Iman Sadri; Adel Arezki; Félix Couture; David-Dan Nguyen; Russell Schwartz; Ahmed S Zakaria; Dean Elterman; Enrique Rijo; Vincent Misrai; Thorsten Bach; Claus G Roehrborn; Kevin C Zorn Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 4.226