Stephan Madersbacher1, Claus G Roehrborn2, Matthias Oelke3. 1. Department of Urology, Kaiser Franz Josef Hospital, Sigmund Freud Private University, Vienna, Austria. 2. Department of Urology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. 3. Department of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Gronau, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To provide an update on novel minimally invasive lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) treatments in a non-systematic review. To define potential target populations for the various new minimally invasive treatments. METHODS: Recent literature, meta-analyses and guideline recommendations for aquablation (AquaBeam® ; PROCEPT BioRobotics, Redwood City, CA, USA), water vapour thermal therapy (Rezūm® ; Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA), prostate artery embolisation (PAE), prostatic urethral lift (UroLift® ; NeoTract-Teleflex, Pleasanton, CA, USA) and the temporary implantable nitinol device [i-TIND® (nitinol butterfly-like stent ); Medi-Tate Ltd., Or-Akiva, Israel] were reviewed. RESULTS: Procedures that can be performed on an outpatient basis (Rezūm, PAE, UroLift and i-TIND) are not an alternative for the standard patient requiring BPH surgery. Their effect on urinary flow, post-void residual urine volume or bladder outlet obstruction is less pronounced than that of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Yet, these options appear to be valuable for those patients unfit for surgery, men who want to avoid medical therapy in general, or those who want to avoid sexual side-effects associated with medical therapy or standard BPH surgery (e.g. TURP). Aquablation is the first successfully operationalised robotic resection system, especially for patients with prostates >50 g. Nevertheless, long-term data are necessary for all novel, minimally invasive treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Better designed clinical trials, a clearer definition of target populations and a more realistic marketing allow a better characterisation of novel minimally invasive therapies for LUTS/BPH. It is hoped that some of these novel devices will stand the test of time, in contrast to the vast majority of their predecessors.
OBJECTIVES: To provide an update on novel minimally invasive lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) treatments in a non-systematic review. To define potential target populations for the various new minimally invasive treatments. METHODS: Recent literature, meta-analyses and guideline recommendations for aquablation (AquaBeam® ; PROCEPT BioRobotics, Redwood City, CA, USA), water vapour thermal therapy (Rezūm® ; Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA), prostate artery embolisation (PAE), prostatic urethral lift (UroLift® ; NeoTract-Teleflex, Pleasanton, CA, USA) and the temporary implantable nitinol device [i-TIND® (nitinol butterfly-like stent ); Medi-Tate Ltd., Or-Akiva, Israel] were reviewed. RESULTS: Procedures that can be performed on an outpatient basis (Rezūm, PAE, UroLift and i-TIND) are not an alternative for the standard patient requiring BPH surgery. Their effect on urinary flow, post-void residual urine volume or bladder outlet obstruction is less pronounced than that of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Yet, these options appear to be valuable for those patients unfit for surgery, men who want to avoid medical therapy in general, or those who want to avoid sexual side-effects associated with medical therapy or standard BPH surgery (e.g. TURP). Aquablation is the first successfully operationalised robotic resection system, especially for patients with prostates >50 g. Nevertheless, long-term data are necessary for all novel, minimally invasive treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Better designed clinical trials, a clearer definition of target populations and a more realistic marketing allow a better characterisation of novel minimally invasive therapies for LUTS/BPH. It is hoped that some of these novel devices will stand the test of time, in contrast to the vast majority of their predecessors.
Authors: Chi-Hang Yee; Sui-Fan Tang; Steffi Kar-Kei Yuen; Chi-Kwok Chan; Jeremy Y C Teoh; Peter K F Chiu; Chi-Fai Ng Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2022-05-27 Impact factor: 2.266