BACKROUND: Aim of our study is to compare the surgery outcomes and safety of button bipolar enucleation of the prostate vs. open prostatectomy in patients with large prostates (> 80 g) in a single-centre cohort study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement undergoing button bipolar enucleation of the prostate (B-TUEP) or open prostatectomy (OP) between May 2012 and December 2013 were enroled in our study. Data on clinical history, physical examination, urinary symptoms, erectile function, uroflowmetry and prostate volume were collected at 0, 1, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Early and long-term complications were recorded. RESULTS: Overall, 240 patients were enroled. Out of them 111 patients (46%) performed an OP and 129 patients (54%) performed a B-TUEP. In terms of efficacy, both procedures showed durable results at three years with a reintervention rate of 7.5% in the OP group and 5% in the B-TUEP group. In terms of safety, B-TUEP presented less high-grade complications when compared with OP. CONCLUSIONS: In our single-centre study, B-TUEP represents a valid alternative to OP with excellent outcomes at three years. Further multicentre studies should confirm our results.
BACKROUND: Aim of our study is to compare the surgery outcomes and safety of button bipolar enucleation of the prostate vs. open prostatectomy in patients with large prostates (> 80 g) in a single-centre cohort study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement undergoing button bipolar enucleation of the prostate (B-TUEP) or open prostatectomy (OP) between May 2012 and December 2013 were enroled in our study. Data on clinical history, physical examination, urinary symptoms, erectile function, uroflowmetry and prostate volume were collected at 0, 1, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Early and long-term complications were recorded. RESULTS: Overall, 240 patients were enroled. Out of them 111 patients (46%) performed an OP and 129 patients (54%) performed a B-TUEP. In terms of efficacy, both procedures showed durable results at three years with a reintervention rate of 7.5% in the OP group and 5% in the B-TUEP group. In terms of safety, B-TUEP presented less high-grade complications when compared with OP. CONCLUSIONS: In our single-centre study, B-TUEP represents a valid alternative to OP with excellent outcomes at three years. Further multicentre studies should confirm our results.