No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Bipolar plasma enucleation of the prostate vs open prostatectomy in large benign prostatic hyperplasia cases - A medium-term, prospective, randomized comparison
BJU International
... Still, both BPEP as well as its' predecessor, the plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP), were emphasized by several reports as able to reach substantial benefi ts in high volume glands 5,6 . Generally speaking, a favora- ble clinical parallel to standard OP has been constantly outlined for bipolar electrosurgery as a viable tool in achieving a successful transurethral enucleation of the prostatic bulk 7,8 . ...
... Last but not least, the capacity to achieve a sa- tisfactory prostatic bulk removal should defi nitely be accounted for as a defi ning parameter while outlining therapeutic success in benign prostatic obstruction 4,5,7,8 . Naturally, the actual BPH tissue ablation capability can be measured during the medium and long term follow- up based on the mean postoperative PSA levels 1 . ...
... It is to hope that Gilling's concern raised in a comment in 2013 [16] that "commercial considerations rather than science will probably be the major determining factor" for the choice of a technique will not come to pass by the introduction of the new term "EEP" with its overarching principle of anatomical enucleation. I would rephrase the then valid title of his excellent review in 2008 [17] to "EEP is the best treatment for BPO refractory to medication." ...
The latest update of the EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, incl. Benign Prostatic Obstruction in 2016 announced a novel acronym for transurethral Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate (EEP). This was inspired by a meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials on Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HolEP) and bipolar enucleation versus open simple prostatectomy. EEP codes for the common ground of both techniques: "anatomical enucleation." Although study quality with regard to the availability of long-term randomized controlled trials is at the moment mostly available for HoLEP, and bipolar enucleation, the existing data of all other enucleating techniques that have been demonstrated to perform anatomical enucleation as well should also been summarized under the same term. This editorial is a call for embracing this acronym of EEP for all anatomical enucleating techniques in order to serve for the transition from the age of TURP and open prostatectomy toward the age of EEP.
Background
Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is the most common condition affecting the male lower urinary tract. Besides transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), vaporization of the prostate and endoscopic enucleation of the prostate are available.
Objectives
To provide an overview of the current status of surgical therapies for BPH.
Materials and methods
Narrative review of the literature on the surgical treatment of BPH.
Results
Besides TURP, which still can be regarded as the reference technique for surgical treatment of BPH in men with a prostate volume <80 cc, greenlight laser vaporization of the prostate (GLV) and endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) are established and evidence-based alternatives. A multitude of prospective randomized trials could show comparable functional outcomes of GLV or EEP in comparison to TURP. Based on lower comorbidity and comparable outcomes, bipolar TURP rather than monopolar TURP should be regarded as the surgical reference technique. In patients with ongoing oral anticoagulation of thrombocyte aggregation inhibition, GLV provides high intra- und postoperative safety. Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is the only transurethral surgical method which provides high level evidence concerning safety and efficacy in patients with prostates >80 cc.
Conclusions
Choice of surgical treatment of BPH should be individualized and based on prostate size, comorbidities and surgical experience.
BACKGROUND
In the last 20 years various transurethral endoscopic enucleation techniques (EEP) have been established as a substitute for open prostatectomy (OP) and TURP. Since the 2016 update of the "EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), including Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO)", Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and bipolar enucleation being summarized as anatomical enucleating techniques are proposed as first choice for the surgical management of BPO of large volume prostates.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this review is to demonstrate the available data on long-term outcomes of current EEP techniques.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed/Medline and Scopus were searched using the terms: long term, HoLEP, ThuLEP, ThuVEP, DiLEP, ELEP, GreenlEP, Greenlight enucleation, bipolar enucleation, plasmakinetic enucleation, monopolar enucleation, and transurethral enucleation. Studies with a follow-up ≥48 months were selected.
RESULTS
In all, 5 randomized controlled trials (2 HoLEP, 2 bipolar enucleation, 1 Thulium laser resection of the prostate in tangerine technique [TmLR-TT]), 3 prospective cohort studies (2 thulium vapoenucleation [ThuVEP], 1 TmLRP-TT), and 2 retrospective studies with large patient cohorts were selected. All EEP were equivalent to OP with regard to effectivity and durability of results. The rate of secondary surgical procedures in HolEP, ThuVEP, bipolar enucleation and tangerine technique (TmLRP-TT) was 0-1.2 % for reTURP, 1.9-3.75 % for urethrotomy, and 0.9-4 % for bladder neck resection. No significant difference in the individual studies was found when compared to OP. For bipolar enucleation vs. TURP long-term results for uroflow, residual urine, and IPSS were significantly better at 60 months for bipolar enucleation. One RCT TmLRP-TT vs. TURP at the 48-month follow-up found no significant difference.
CONCLUSION
Various transurethral EEP can be considered as equally safe and effective anatomical enucleation techniques. All displayed EEPs match the durability of OP. The choice of energy source for EEP seems to be secondary and a function of resources and personal preference of the skilled surgeon.
Unlabelled:
WHAT'S KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT? AND WHAT DOES THE STUDY ADD?: According to the EAU Guidelines 2012, large size benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) cases (>80 mL) continue to have open prostatectomy as the first line treatment alternative, despite the substantial peri-operative morbidity and extended catheterization and convalescence periods related to this undoubtedly invasive approach. During the past two decades, holmium laser enucleation of the prostate was constantly described as a successful choice for this category of patients. According to rather numerous studies, the technique displayed superior results in terms of surgical safety and postoperative recovery compared with the open procedure. On the other hand, the concept of electrosurgical enucleation of the prostate, using either a monopolar or bipolar cutting current, materialized into several technical applications that eventually failed to gain general acknowledgement as reliable alternatives to the BPH transurethral approach. While keeping in mind the already proved advantage of enucleating substantial quantities of BPH tissue, bipolar plasma enucleation of the prostate was introduced as a novel endoscopic approach in cases of large prostates. The present trial represents the first prospective, medium-term, randomized comparison to be published of this innovative technique with standard open prostatectomy. Basically, the premises for a viable alternative relied on the practical advantages provided by the 'button' electrode, mainly the large surface creating the conditions for a fast enucleation process, continuous vaporization and concomitant haemostasis. Eventually, it was concluded that the plasma enucleation procedure distinguished itself as a successful treatment option in large BPH patients, characterized by good surgical efficiency, significantly reduced complications, faster postoperative recovery, similar prostatic tissue ablation capabilities and satisfactory follow-up results compared with the open technique. Most importantly, plasma-button enucleation patients benefited from a similar 12 months' outcome from the perspectives of symptom scores and voiding parameters when drawing a parallel with open surgery results, thus underlining the reliable viability of this type of endoscopic approach.
Objectives:
To evaluate the viability of bipolar plasma enucleation of the prostate (BPEP) by comparison with open transvesical prostatectomy (OP) in cases of large prostates with regard to surgical efficacy and peri-operative morbidity. To compare the medium-term follow-up parameters specific for the two methods.
Patients and methods:
A total of 140 benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients with prostate volume >80 mL, maximum flow rate (Qmax ) <10 mL/s and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) >19 were randomized in the two study arms. All cases were assessed preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery by IPSS, Qmax , quality of life score (QoL) and post-voiding residual urinary volume (PVR). The prostate volume and prostate specific antigen (PSA) level were measured at 6 and 12 months.
Results:
The BPEP and OP techniques emphasized similar mean operating durations (91.4 vs 87.5 min) and resected tissue weights (108.3 vs 115.4 g). The postoperative haematuria rate (2.9% vs 12.9%) as well as the mean haemoglobin drop (1.7 vs 3.1 g/dL), catheterization period (1.5 vs 5.8 days) and hospital stay (2.1 vs 6.9 days) were significantly improved for BPEP. Recatheterization for acute urinary retention was more frequent in the OP group (8.6% vs 1.4%), while the rates of early irritative symptoms were similar for BPEP and OP (11.4% vs 7.1%). During the follow-up period, no statistically significant difference was determined in terms of IPSS, Qmax , QoL, PVR, PSA level and postoperative prostate volume between the two series.
Conclusions:
BPEP represents a promising endoscopic approach in large BPH cases, characterized by good surgical efficiency and similar BPH tissue removal capabilities compared with standard transvesical prostatectomy. BPEP patients benefited from significantly reduced complications, shorter convalescence and satisfactory follow-up symptom scores and voiding parameters.
To report an update of the change in usage trends for different surgical treatments of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) among the United States Medicare population data from 2000-2008. The rate of usage of thermotherapy and laser therapy in the surgical treatment of BPH has been changing over the past decade in conjunction with a steady decrease of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).
Using the 100% Medicare carrier file for the years 2000-2008, we calculated counts and population-adjusted rates of BPH surgery. Rates of TURP, thermotherapy, and laser-using modalities were calculated and compared in relation to age, race, clinical setting, and reimbursement.
After years of a steady rise, the total rate of all BPH procedures peaked in 2005 at 1078/100,000 and then declined by 15.4% to 912/100,000 in 2008. TURP rates continued to decline from 670 in 2000 to 351/100,000 in 2008. Rates of microwave thermoablation peaked in 2006 at 266/100,000 and then declined 26% in 2008. Laser vaporization almost completely replaced laser coagulation and in 2008 was the most commonly performed procedure second to TURP, with the majority performed as outpatient procedures (70%) and an increasing percentage in the office (12%). Men between ages 70 and 75 had the highest rate of procedures. Reimbursement rates correlate using some but not all procedures. Racial disparities reported previously appear to have resolved.
Surgical treatment of BPH continues to change rapidly. TURP continues to decline and laser vaporization is the fastest growing modality. There is a big shift toward outpatient/office procedures. Reimbursement rates do not appear to have a consistent effect on usage.
To present our experience with robot-assisted simple prostatectomy in patients with large gland adenoma (>100 g) that would not be amenable to transurethral treatments.
From August 2009 to May 2011, 13 robot-assisted simple suprapubic prostatectomies were performed in patients with symptomatic large gland (>100 g) prostatomegaly on transrectal ultrasonography (mean 163 cc). Essential aspects of our technique include a transverse cystotomy just proximal to the prostatovesical junction and use of a robotic tenotomy grasper to aid in adenoma dissection.
Mean operative time was 179 minutes (range 90-270 min), and mean estimated blood loss was 219 mL (range 50-500 mL). Mean hospital stay was 2.7 days (range 1-8 d), and the mean urethral catheterization time was 8.8 days (range 5-14 d). None of the patients needed blood transfusion. One patient had an intraoperative urinary leak after bladder closure that was managed with prolonged urethral catheterization (14 d). Histopathologic analysis confirmed benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in all patients, and mean specimen weight on pathologic examination was 127 g (range 100-165 g). Mean follow-up duration was 7.2 months with all patients having a minimum of a 4-month follow-up. Significant improvements were noted in the International Prostate Symptom Score (preoperative vs postoperative 18.1 vs 5.3, p<0.001) and the maximum urine flow rate (preoperative vs postoperative 4.3 vs 19.1 mL/min, P<0.001).
Minimally invasive robot-assisted simple prostatectomy is technically feasible in patients with large volume (>100 g) BPH and is associated with significant improvements in obstructive urinary symptoms. Surgeons with robotic expertise may consider using this approach for treatment of their patients with large volume BPH.
GreenLight laser vaporization is established as a minimally invasive procedure to treat patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Despite good functional results, it may be difficult to achieve adequate tissue removal for large prostates. In this study, we evaluated whether a transurethral enucleation technique is feasible with the GreenLight laser as a possible way to improve the amount of tissue removed.
Following the technique described by Gilling for the holmium laser, we carried out transurethral enucleation of prostate adenoma with the 120W HPS GreenLight laser in 21 consecutive patients. Preoperative data were collected prospectively; prostate volume, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), postvoid residual (PVR), prostate-specific antigen level, peak urinary flow rate, operative time, catherization period, length of hospitalization, and perioperative complications were recorded as well as the weight of the enucleated tissue and the applied laser energy. For follow-up, IPSS and PVR were recorded. Data are presented as mean±standard deviation.
Fifty-two percent of the patients had preoperative urinary retention. Preoperative prostate volume was 74.6±21.7 cc; 34.7±21.7 g of tissue were enucleated. IPSS was reduced from 25±6 to 5±9 (P=0.0001), PVR from 126±80 to 11±18 (P=0.002) by GreenLight laser enucleation. Serious complications were not observed. Operative time was 112±27 minutes. Catheter time was 1.2±0.4 days. The length of hospitalization was 3.6±0.9 days.
GreenLight laser enucleation is feasible and safe. Tissue reduction is complete, and good functional results are achieved. All patients were able to void properly. Major complications were not observed. The procedure is technically demanding, resulting in long operative times at the first interventions.
Treatment of the large (>100 g) prostatic adenoma often involves open prostatectomy, with its attendant risks and morbidity. Enucleation of the entire adenoma endoscopically is possible with the holmium:YAG laser and tissue removal from within the bladder by a transurethral tissue morcellator. These patients can usually be discharged from the hospital the following day without a catheter.
A series of 43 patients with prostates 100 g was followed for 6 months after laser resection.
The mean morcellation time was 16.1 minutes. The mean catheter time was 19.7 hours, and the mean hospital time was 28.4 hours. One patient required readmission for evacuation of tissue fragments. The average AUA Symptom Score declined from 23.5 preoperatively to 2.8 at 6 months postoperatively, and the mean Qmax increased from 9.0 mL/sec to 24.8 mL/sec.
The holmium:YAG laser can be used to enucleate the adenoma in a large prostate in much the way the surgeon's finger does during open prostatectomy.
Prospectively evaluate perioperative outcomes and 2-yr follow-up after holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) and standard open prostatectomy (OP) for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia-related obstructed voiding symptoms, with prostates >70 g.
From March 2003 to December 2004, 80 consecutive patients were randomised for surgical treatment with HoLEP (n=41) or standard OP (n=39). All patients were preoperatively assessed with International Prostate Symptom Score and International Index of Erectile Function questionnaires and complete urodynamic evaluation. Intraoperative and perioperative parameters such as blood loss, catheter removal, and hospital stays were assessed. Early and late complications were recorded. Patients were evaluated at 1-, 3-, 12-, and 24-mo follow-ups with the same tests.
Operating room time was significantly shorter for the OP group (72.09+/-21.22 min vs. 58.31+/-11.95 min, p<0.0001); catheter removal (1.5+/-1.07 d and 4.1+/-0.5 d, p<0.001) and hospital stay (2.7+/-1.1 d vs. 5.4+/-1.05 d, p<0.001) were shorter in the HoLEP group. Blood loss was less and blood transfusions fewer in the HoLEP group (p<0.001). In both groups urodynamic and uroflowmetry findings improved from baseline, were still evident at the 24-mo follow-up, and were comparable between the two groups. Late complications were also comparable.
HoLEP is a feasible technique for treating large prostates. Functional results are similar to OP at the 2-yr follow-up. Reduced catheterisation, hospital stay, and blood loss make HoLEP an attractive option for the treatment of large prostates.
To compare the alternative energy sources of the holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser and bipolar plasmakinetic energy for endoscopic enucleation.
A prospective, randomized controlled trial was undertaken, with 20 patients assigned to each group. The preoperative and postoperative measures included transrectal ultrasound-assessed prostate volume, postvoid residual urine volume, and urodynamic evaluation findings. The intraoperative measures included procedure length, energy use, and specimen weight. All adverse events were recorded at each postoperative visit in a 1, 3, 6, and 12-month protocol.
No differences were found in the preoperative characteristics between the two groups. The significant differences favoring holmium laser enucleation of the prostate compared with plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate were seen in the operative time (43.6 versus 60.5 minutes), recovery room time (47.1 versus 65.6 minutes), and bladder irrigation requirement (5% versus 35%). The outcomes after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate were in all other respects similar by the postoperative outcome measures assessed.
Plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate is a safe and technically feasible procedure for the enucleation of prostatic adenomata. Plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate is limited by the longer operative and recovery room times, as well as a more pronounced postoperative irrigation requirement because of reduced visibility and a greater propensity for bleeding. The transfusion rates and catheterization and hospitalization times were similar. The optimal energy source for enucleation should still be considered the holmium laser, but bipolar energy can be considered by users already experienced with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate.
To report 5-year follow-up results of a randomised clinical trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) with open prostatectomy (OP).
One hundred twenty patients with prostates greater than 100g in weight according to transrectal ultrasound were randomised to either the HoLEP or the OP group (ie, 60 patients to each group). Preoperative and postoperative assessments included American Urological Association Symptom Score (AUA-SS), maximum urinary flow rates (Qmax), and postvoid residual urine (PVRU) volumes. Measurements were performed at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 mo. Postoperative outcome data were compared. All complications were recorded.
Five years postoperatively, a total of 46 patients (38.3%) were lost to follow-up or had to be excluded from the study. All the remaining 74 patients (42 HoLEP vs. 32 OP patients, p=0.11) had undergone the 5-yr follow-up assessments. Mean AUA-SS was 3.0 in both groups (p=0.98), mean Qmax was 24.4 ml/s in both groups (p=0.97) and PVRU volume was 11 ml in the HoLEP and 5 ml in the OP group (p=0.25). Late complications consisted of urethral strictures and bladder-neck contractures; reoperation rates were 5% in the HoLEP and 6.7% in the OP group (p=1.0). No patient developed benign prostatic hyperplasia recurrence.
Five years after the operation, the improvements in micturition obtained with HoLEP and OP were equally good, and reoperation rates similarly low. HoLEP seems to be a true endourological alternative to OP.
Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates >70 g: 24-month follow-up
- R Naspro
- N Suardi
- A Salonia
- Et al