Does Cystolitholapaxy at the Time of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate Affect Outcomes?

To compare the outcomes of men undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) with and without concurrent holmium laser cystolitholapaxy (HLC). A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed on patients who underwent HoLEP: Group 1 (N = 279) and HoLEP with concurrent HLC: Group 2 (N = 41) between June 2008 and July 2015. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared. The average bladder stone burden was 3.6 cm. Preoperative characteristics were similar. Not surprisingly, group 2 had longer operative times (172 minutes vs 146 minutes, P = .01) (Table 1) whereas postvoid residual was slightly higher than in group 1 at 6-week follow-up (30 mL vs 52 mL, P = .04). This difference was not clinically significant. Group 2 had a higher rate of early urinary incontinence (UI) (26.8% versus 12.5%, P = .03) (Table 3); however, only 2 patients in the entire cohort experienced long-term UI. Otherwise, outcomes including blood loss, urinary symptom scores, flow rates, and complication rates were similar between the 2 groups. This is the largest series of HoLEP with concurrent HLC studied. Patients undergoing concurrent HoLEP and HLC can be counseled that although there is nearly a 30% rate of UI immediately following surgery, they can likely expect complete resolution by 3-6 months. Holmium laser treatment should be considered in all patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia with bladder outlet obstruction and bladder stones, as this multimodality tool treats both pathologies, and results in excellent outcomes.

Tangpaitoon T ，Marien T ，Kadihasanoglu M ，Miller NL ... -  《-》

Feasibility of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for recurrent/residual benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

Study Type--Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? The major advantage of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) depends on the ability to use the native anatomical plane between the prostate adenoma and surgical capsule, peeling each prostatic lobe from the capsule. HoLEP is associated with less catheterisation time, hospital stay and blood loss than transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or open prostatectomy. Urodynamic relief of obstruction has been reported to be better with HoLEP than TURP. However, surgical treatment of recurrent prostatic obstruction after previous transurethral surgery for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia is more challenging because of loss of anatomical landmarks resulting in either incomplete removal or incontinence. HoLEP for recurrent symptoms due to residual or re-growing prostatic adenoma seems to be as safe, feasible and efficient as HoLEP for de novo cases. The surgical plane between the adenoma and the surgical capsule was still accessible resulting in a durable long-term outcome with minimal side-effects. Previous transurethral prostatic surgery is not a contraindication for HoLEP. • To assess the technical feasibility, functional outcome and morbidity of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in patients with previous transurethral prostate surgery. 'Redo' surgery for recurrent or residual BPH poses a technical challenge with uncertain outcome as a result of disturbed anatomical landmarks with no clear surgical limits. • We retrospectively reviewed 1054 patients who underwent HoLEP for symptomatic BPH. • Patients were stratified into two groups, group-I with no previous prostate surgery or primary-HoLEP (978 patients) and group-II with history of previous prostate surgery or secondary-HoLEP (76). • All patients' variables as well as follow-up data were assessed and compared. • There were no significant differences in baseline criteria between the two groups (P > 0.05). • In group-II, HoLEP was done after a median (range) of 66 (13-121) months from previous prostate surgeries, including transurethral resection of the prostate (48 patients), HoLEP (eight), transurethral incision of the prostate (nine), photoselective vaporization of the prostate (four) and other procedures (seven). •  In both groups, routine HoLEP technique was adopted, the plane of enucleation could be identified without extra difficulty. However, more energy per gram of prostate tissue was needed in group-II (P < 0.05). • Operative auxiliary procedures were indicated in 1.9% of group-I, and 1.3% of group-II (P > 0.05). There were no operative complications or blood transfusion in group-II. The mean hospital stay and catheter time was similar in both groups. Early and late postoperative complications were not statistically different (P > 0.05). • At 1 month the mean maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max) ) was 22.3 and 18.8 mL/s, postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) was 46 and 45 mL, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 7.04 and 7.08, and the health-related quality of life (HRQL) score was 1.57 and 1.56, in group-I and II, respectively. At 1 year the mean Q(max) was 23.4 and 25.9 mL/s, PVR was 32.5 and 24.1 mL, IPSS was 4.5 and 4.4, and the HRQL score was 1.2 and 1.1,) in group-I and II, respectively (P > 0.05). • Reoperation for recurrent obstruction was indicated in 4% in group-I and 5.2% in group-II (P > 0.05). • Secondary-HoLEP procedures seem to be safe and technically feasible with comparable functional outcomes as those of primary-HoLEP.

Elshal AM ，Elmansy HM ，Elhilali MM 《-》

Analysis of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate in a High-Volume Center: The Impact of Concomitant Holmium Laser Cystolitholapaxy.

Romero-Otero J ，García González L ，García-Gómez B ，Alonso-Isa M ，García-Rojo E ，Gil-Moradillo J ，Duarte-Ojeda JM ，Rodríguez-Antolín A ... -  《-》

A randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate with transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands (40 to 200 grams).

Tan AH ，Gilling PJ ，Kennett KM ，Frampton C ，Westenberg AM ，Fraundorfer MR ... -  《-》

One-year Surgical Outcomes of Complete or Incomplete Enucleation of Prostate by Monopolar Electrocoagulation, Photoselective Vapoenucleation of 120-W GreenLight Laser, and Holmium Laser.

To evaluate surgical outcomes of patients who underwent complete or incomplete enucleation technique during a short-term postoperative period. Patients having intractable lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostates >30 g with obstructed pattern in the urodynamic examinations were included. They underwent transurethral resection of prostate (TUR-P), 120 W GreenLight laser high power system-photoselective vapoenucleation of prostate (HPS-PVEP), or holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP). Patients with the size of remnant prostates minus surgical defects <25 g were grouped into the completely enucleated group (group C), and others were grouped into the partially enucleated group (group P). Mean prostate-specific antigen value was 3.5 ± 4.5 ng/mL, and mean prostate volume was 58.4 ± 31.0 mL. Complete enucleation rates in TUR-P, HPS-PVEP, and HoLEP groups were 39% (37 out of 95), 54.6% (83 out of 152), and 54.4% (31 out of 57), respectively. Complete enucleation rate of the TUR-P was significantly lower than those of the other 2 groups. Compared with group C, group P had lower maximal flow rate, higher bladder outlet obstruction index, and higher overactive bladder symptom scores. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that smaller prostate, presence of intravesical prostatic protrusion, HoLEP operation, and surgeons' experience were significant predictors for achieving complete enucleation of prostate. Voiding subscores of group C were significantly higher than those of group P at postoperative 12 months. The performance of HoLEP was superior to other surgical techniques. However, HPS-PVEP with vapoenucleation showed the comparable enucleation rate with that of HoLEP. Complete enucleation was effective in maintaining outcomes of prostate resection, especially voiding subscores.

Cho SY ，Park J ，Yoo S ，Cho MC ，Jeong H ，Son H ... -  《-》