Zheng Deng1, Menghao Sun1, Yiping Zhu1, Jian Zhuo1, Fujun Zhao1, Shujie Xia2, Bangmin Han3, Thomas R W Herrmann4. 1. Department of Urology, Shanghai First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No.100, Haining Road, Shanghai, 200080, China. 2. Department of Urology, Shanghai First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No.100, Haining Road, Shanghai, 200080, China. xsjurologist@163.com. 3. Department of Urology, Shanghai First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No.100, Haining Road, Shanghai, 200080, China. hanbm@163.com. 4. Department of Urology and Urological Oncology, Hanover Medical School (MHH), Carl Neuberg Str. 1, 30625, Hanover, Germany. herrmann.thomas@mh-hannover.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of thulium laser VapoResection of the prostate (ThuVaRP) versus standard traditional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or plasmakinetic resection of prostate (PKRP) for benign prostatic obstruction. METHODS: Systematic searches were performed in the Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CNKI in December 2017. The outcomes of demographic and clinical characteristics, perioperative variables, complications, and postoperative efficacy including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), and postvoid residual (PVR) were assessed. RESULTS: 16 studies were selected in the meta-analysis including nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven non-RCTs. Among of them, nine studies compared ThuVaRP with PKRP, while seven studies compared ThuVaRP with TURP. It seemed that ThuVaRP needed longer operation time than TURP (WMD = 6.41, 95% CI 1.38-11.44, p = 0.01) and PKRP (WMD = 10.15, 95% CI 5.20-15.10, p < 0.0001). ThuVaRP was associated with less serum hemoglobin decreased, catheterization time, and the length of hospital stay compared with TURP (WMD = - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.77 to 0.38, p < 0.00001; WMD = - 1.89, 95% CI - 2.67 to 1.11, p < 0.00001; WMD = - 2.25, 95% CI - 2.91 to 1.60, p < 0.00001) and PKRP (WMD = - 0.28, 95% CI - 0.46 to 0.10, p = 0.002; WMD = - 1.88, 95% CI - 2.87 to 0.89, p = 0.0002; WMD = - 2.08, 95% CI - 2.63 to 1.54, p<0.00001). According to our assessment, there was no significantly difference in postoperative efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled data indicated that ThuVaRP had a nearly efficacy to TURP and PKRP based on IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and PVR. Although ThuVaRP was associated with longer operation time, it got distinct superiority on serum hemoglobin decreased, catheterization time, and hospital stay.
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of thulium laser VapoResection of the prostate (ThuVaRP) versus standard traditional transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or plasmakinetic resection of prostate (PKRP) for benign prostatic obstruction. METHODS: Systematic searches were performed in the Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CNKI in December 2017. The outcomes of demographic and clinical characteristics, perioperative variables, complications, and postoperative efficacy including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), and postvoid residual (PVR) were assessed. RESULTS: 16 studies were selected in the meta-analysis including nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven non-RCTs. Among of them, nine studies compared ThuVaRP with PKRP, while seven studies compared ThuVaRP with TURP. It seemed that ThuVaRP needed longer operation time than TURP (WMD = 6.41, 95% CI 1.38-11.44, p = 0.01) and PKRP (WMD = 10.15, 95% CI 5.20-15.10, p < 0.0001). ThuVaRP was associated with less serum hemoglobin decreased, catheterization time, and the length of hospital stay compared with TURP (WMD = - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.77 to 0.38, p < 0.00001; WMD = - 1.89, 95% CI - 2.67 to 1.11, p < 0.00001; WMD = - 2.25, 95% CI - 2.91 to 1.60, p < 0.00001) and PKRP (WMD = - 0.28, 95% CI - 0.46 to 0.10, p = 0.002; WMD = - 1.88, 95% CI - 2.87 to 0.89, p = 0.0002; WMD = - 2.08, 95% CI - 2.63 to 1.54, p<0.00001). According to our assessment, there was no significantly difference in postoperative efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled data indicated that ThuVaRP had a nearly efficacy to TURP and PKRP based on IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and PVR. Although ThuVaRP was associated with longer operation time, it got distinct superiority on serum hemoglobin decreased, catheterization time, and hospital stay.
Entities:
Keywords:
2-micron; Benign prostatic obstruction,; Plasmakinetic resection of prostate,; Safety and efficacy; Thulium laser VapoResection of the prostate,; Thulium laser,; Transurethral resection of the prostate,
Authors: Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl; Stephanie Huckele; Patrick Honeck; Peter Alken; Thomas Knoll; Maurice Stephan Michel; Axel Häcker Journal: J Endourol Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.942
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: Hashim Hashim; Jo Worthington; Paul Abrams; Grace Young; Hilary Taylor; Sian M Noble; Sara T Brookes; Nikki Cotterill; Tobias Page; K Satchi Swami; J Athene Lane Journal: Lancet Date: 2020-07-04 Impact factor: 79.321