Literature DB >> 32124019

Second generation of temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in men with LUTS: 2 year results of the MT-02-study.

Gregor Kadner1, Massimo Valerio2, Ioannis Giannakis3, Arya Manit4, Nicolaas Lumen5, Brian S H Ho6, Sergio Alonso7, Claude Schulman8, Neil Barber9, Daniele Amparore10, Francesco Porpiglia10.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Assessing medium-term functional results of a novel minimally-invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms due to BPO with the second generation of the temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind; Medi-Tate Ltd®, Israel): 2-year follow-up of a single-arm, prospective, international multicenter study. Further, we aimed to identify preoperative baseline parameters predicting response to iTind treatment.
METHODS: Following local ethical committee approval in every participating centre, 81 men with symptomatic BPO (IPSS ≥ 10, peak urinary flow < 12 ml/s, and prostate volume < 75 ml) were enrolled in this study. Patients with PVR > 250 ml, obstructive median lobe, previous prostatic surgery, confounding bladder or sphincter dysfunction based on medical history, active urinary infection and unable to interrupt antithrombotic or antiplatelet treatment were exclusion criteria. A wash-out period of 1 month for alpha-blockers and 6 months for 5-ARIs was mandatory to avoid confounders. The procedure was performed as previously described: implantation under light sedation and removal 5-7 days later with topical sedation. Patients were assessed for perioperative results including OR-time, pain (VAS) and complications (Clavien-Dindo-Grading System); and for functional results (PVR, Qmax, IPSS) and quality of life (QoL) including sexual and ejaculatory function using two yes/no questions. Follow-up assessments were done at 1, 3, and 6 months, and 1 and 2 years.
RESULTS: Of the 81 patients initially enrolled in this study, follow-up included 67 men at 1 year and 51 men at 2 years. For the 51 men included in the present analysis, the median age was 65 years, median prostate volume 37 ml (range 16-65 ml). Baseline values for IPSS and QoL were 20.51 ± 4.58, 3.96 ± 0.87. Qmax and PVR were 7.62 ± 2.25 ml/s and 65.84 ± 38.46, respectively. No intraoperative complications were observed and the average pain level recorded on the visual analogue scale (VAS) was 3.2 ± 1.6. A significant reduction in symptoms and improvement in urinary flow was observed (p < 0.0001) at all assessment points: IPSS-score and QoL improved to 8.51 ± 5.51 and 1.76 ± 1.32, respectively; and Qmax increased to 16.00 ± 7.43 ml/s. None of the patients who were previously sexually active reported a deterioration in sexual or ejaculatory functions according to two yes/no questions over the follow-up period. Excluding the patients lost at follow-up, five patients underwent surgery between 12 and 24 months. Upon investigation, it was discovered that four of the five patients requiring surgery had median lobes and were protocol deviators. A failure analysis was carried out for all 81 patients in order to identify baseline parameters that could predict treatment failure. 58.33% of patients in the failure group (7 out of 12) had median lobes which was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.0001). None of the other preoperative variables (age, prostate volume, IPSS scores, Qmax, PVR, and PSA) were found to predict response to iTind treatment.
CONCLUSION: iTind treatment for BPO-related LUTS showed marked and durable reduction in symptoms and improvement of functional parameters and quality of life at 24 months of follow-up. It was found that median lobe may predict failure of iTind treatment. According to the yes/no questions, ejaculatory and sexual functions do not seem to be effected following treatment, however, this finding must be supported with further studies using the accepted tools.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BPO; LUTS; Minimal invasive techniques; Nitinol; Urethral implantable device; iTIND

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32124019     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03140-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  3 in total

Review 1.  The management of prostatic obstruction with urethral stents.

Authors:  Charles C Peyton; Gopal H Badlani
Journal:  Can J Urol       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 1.344

Review 2.  The influence of the medical treatment of LUTS on benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery: do we operate too late?

Authors:  Fabrizio Presicce; Cosimo DE Nunzio; Mauro Gacci; Roman Sosnowsky; Riccardo Lombardo; Francesco Porpiglia; Andrea Tubaro
Journal:  Minerva Urol Nefrol       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 3.720

3.  Five year results of the prospective randomized controlled prostatic urethral L.I.F.T. study.

Authors:  Claus G Roehrborn; Jack Barkin; Steven N Gange; Neal D Shore; Jonathan L Giddens; Damien M Bolton; Barrett E Cowan; Anthony L Cantwell; Kevin T McVary; Alexis E Te; Shahram S Gholami; William G Moseley; Peter T Chin; William T Dowling; Sheldon J Freedman; Peter F Incze; K Scott Coffield; Sean Herron; Prem Rashid; Daniel B Rukstalis
Journal:  Can J Urol       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.344

  3 in total
  6 in total

Review 1.  Indications, techniques, and role of new minimally invasive benign prostate hyperplasia surgical options.

Authors:  Serdar Yalçın; Lütfi Tunç
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2020-07-02

2.  [Minimally invasive treatment options for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia].

Authors:  J Franz; R Suarez-Ibarrola; D S Schoeb; C Gratzke; A Miernik
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2021-11-05       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  Pharmacological and interventional treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: An evidence-based comparative review.

Authors:  Sachin Malde; Wayne Lam; Zainal Adwin; Hashim Hashim
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2021-02-03

Review 4.  New Ultra-minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review and Analysis of Comparative Outcomes.

Authors:  Enrico Checcucci; Alessandro Veccia; Sabrina De Cillis; Federico Piramide; Gabriele Volpi; Daniele Amparore; Angela Pecoraro; Alberto Piana; Stefano Granato; Paolo Verri; Michele Sica; Juliette Meziere; Beatrice Carbonaro; Stefano Piscitello; Davide Zamengo; Giovanni Cacciamani; Zhamshid Okhunov; Stefano Puliatti; Mark Taratkin; Josè Marenco; Juan Gomez Rivas; Domenico Veneziano; Umberto Carbonara; Giorgio Ivan Russo; Stefano De Luca; Matteo Manfredi; Cristian Fiori; Riccardo Autorino; Francesco Porpiglia
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2021-09-22

5.  Real-world Early Outcomes and Retreatment Rates Following Water Vapour Ablative Therapy for Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.

Authors:  Danielle Whiting; Mohamed Noureldin; Yehia Abdelmotagly; Maximilian J Johnston; James Brittain; Govindaraj Rajkumar; Amr Emara; Richard Hindley
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2022-04-07

Review 6.  Are all procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia created equal? A systematic review on post-procedural PSA dynamics and its correlation with relief of bladder outlet obstruction.

Authors:  Abhishek Bhat; Ruben Blachman-Braun; Thomas R W Herrmann; Hemendra N Shah
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 3.661

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.