Martin Schoenthaler1, Karl-Dietrich Sievert2, Dominik Stefan Schoeb1, Arkadiusz Miernik1, Thomas Kunit3, Simon Hein1, Thomas R W Herrmann4, Konrad Wilhelm5. 1. Clinic of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Hugstetterstr. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. 2. University of Rostock Urology Clinic, Rostock, Germany. 3. Department of Urology, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria. 4. Department of Urology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 5. Clinic of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Hugstetterstr. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany. Konrad.wilhelm@uniklinik-freiburg.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of combining prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and a limited resection of the prostatic middle lobe or bladder neck incision in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients were treated at two tertiary centers and followed prospectively. Patient evaluations included patient characteristics, relief of LUTS symptoms, erectile and ejaculatory function, continence, operative time and adverse events. Patients were followed for a mean of 10.9 months. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were as follows: age 66 years (46-85), prostate volume 39.6 cc (22-66), preoperative IPSS/AUASI 20 (6-35)/QoL 3.9 (1-6)/peak flow 10.5 mL/s (4.0-19)/post-void residual volume (PVR) 123 mL (0-500). Mean operating time was 31 min (9-55). Postoperative complications were minor except for the surgical retreatment of one patient for blood clot retention (Clavien 3b). One patient required catheterization due to urinary retention. Reduction of symptoms (IPSS - 59.6%), increase in QoL (+ 49.0%), increase in flow (+ 111.5%), and reduction of PVR (- 66.8%) were significant. Antegrade ejaculation was always maintained. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a combination of PUL and transurethral surgical techniques is feasible, safe, and effective. This approach may be offered to patients with moderate size prostates including those with unfavorable anatomic conditions for PUL. This procedure is still 'minimally invasive' and preserves sexual function. In addition, it may add to a higher functional efficacy compared to PUL alone. STUDY REGISTER NUMBER: DRKS00008970.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of combining prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and a limited resection of the prostatic middle lobe or bladder neck incision in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients were treated at two tertiary centers and followed prospectively. Patient evaluations included patient characteristics, relief of LUTS symptoms, erectile and ejaculatory function, continence, operative time and adverse events. Patients were followed for a mean of 10.9 months. RESULTS:Patient characteristics were as follows: age 66 years (46-85), prostate volume 39.6 cc (22-66), preoperative IPSS/AUASI 20 (6-35)/QoL 3.9 (1-6)/peak flow 10.5 mL/s (4.0-19)/post-void residual volume (PVR) 123 mL (0-500). Mean operating time was 31 min (9-55). Postoperative complications were minor except for the surgical retreatment of one patient for blood clot retention (Clavien 3b). One patient required catheterization due to urinary retention. Reduction of symptoms (IPSS - 59.6%), increase in QoL (+ 49.0%), increase in flow (+ 111.5%), and reduction of PVR (- 66.8%) were significant. Antegrade ejaculation was always maintained. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a combination of PUL and transurethral surgical techniques is feasible, safe, and effective. This approach may be offered to patients with moderate size prostates including those with unfavorable anatomic conditions for PUL. This procedure is still 'minimally invasive' and preserves sexual function. In addition, it may add to a higher functional efficacy compared to PUL alone. STUDY REGISTER NUMBER: DRKS00008970.
Authors: Anthony L Cantwell; William K Bogache; Steven F Richardson; Ronald F Tutrone; Jack Barkin; James E Fagelson; Peter T Chin; Henry H Woo Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Kevin T McVary; Claus G Roehrborn; Andrew L Avins; Michael J Barry; Reginald C Bruskewitz; Robert F Donnell; Harris E Foster; Chris M Gonzalez; Steven A Kaplan; David F Penson; James C Ulchaker; John T Wei Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-03-21 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Alexander Bachmann; Andrea Tubaro; Neil Barber; Frank d'Ancona; Gordon Muir; Ulrich Witzsch; Marc-Oliver Grimm; Joan Benejam; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Antony Riddick; Sascha Pahernik; Herman Roelink; Filip Ameye; Christian Saussine; Franck Bruyère; Wolfgang Loidl; Tim Larner; Nirjan-Kumar Gogoi; Richard Hindley; Rolf Muschter; Andrew Thorpe; Nitin Shrotri; Stuart Graham; Moritz Hamann; Kurt Miller; Martin Schostak; Carlos Capitán; Helmut Knispel; J Andrew Thomas Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Henry H Woo; Peter T Chin; Thomas A McNicholas; Harcharan S Gill; Mark K Plante; Reginald C Bruskewitz; Claus G Roehrborn Journal: BJU Int Date: 2011-05-06 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Christian Gratzke; Alexander Bachmann; Aurelien Descazeaud; Marcus J Drake; Stephan Madersbacher; Charalampos Mamoulakis; Matthias Oelke; Kari A O Tikkinen; Stavros Gravas Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-01-19 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Thomas A McNicholas; Henry H Woo; Peter T Chin; Damien Bolton; Manuel Fernández Arjona; Karl-Dietrich Sievert; Martin Schoenthaler; Ulrich Wetterauer; Eric J E J Vrijhof; Steven Gange; Francesco Montorsi Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-01-19 Impact factor: 20.096