medigraphic.com
Organo Oficial de la Sociedad Mexicana de Urología

2022, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Urol 2022; 82 (3)

Comparison of postoperative functional results in holmium laser enucleation of the prostate, green laser photovaporization of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate in the treatment of obstructive prostatic hyperplasia

Cruz-Ordoñez SX, Chein-Vázquez MF, Victorio-Vargas OD, Cervantes-Palma C, Lemus-Hernández LA, Toledo-Díaz MA, Torres-Gómez JJ, Bravo-Castro EI, Díaz-Gómez C, Martínez-Alonso IA, Campos-Salcedo JG

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page:
PDF size: 413.40 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the functional results in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), photovaporization of the prostate with Green- Light ® laser (FTV) and prostate enucleation with Holmium laser (HOLEP), for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction at the Central Military Hospital.
Material and methods: The international index of prostate symptomatology questionnaire (IPSS), Uroflowmetry (Qmax), pre and post void ultrasonography (PVR) were applied to patients undergoing TURP, VTF and HOLEP pre and postoperatory from January 2018 to March 2019. Shapiro-Wilks tests were analyzed for quantitative variables; parametric behavioral data were analyzed with ANOVA tests, and non-parametric data were analyzed with Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis U tests. GraphPad PRISM v7.0 statistical package was used.
Results: 46 patients underwent to TURP, 62 to HOLEP and 17 to VFT were evaluated, removing those who did not achieve complete postoperative follow-up; describing the demographic characteristics, the most frequent comorbidities and the parameters evaluated preoperatively. At follow-up, HOLEP was slightly better than FTV or TURP; without finding statistical significance between the groups, observing an important improvement in the reference values of IPSS, Qmax and PVR after surgery in all populations.
Conclusions: No superiority of any technique was proven in short-term postoperative functional results, so we propose to perform long-term studies, considering adding trans and postoperative parameters in order to demonstrate superiority of these techniques.


REFERENCES

  1. Wein AJ, Kavoussi LR, Partin AW, Peters CA.Campbell-Walsh Urology 11th Edition Review.Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015. 624 p.

  2. Ricci Arriola P, Solá Dalenz V, Pardo Schanz J.Estudio de la incontinencia de orina femeninamediante urodinamia monocanal: comparacióncon los síntomas de ingreso. Análisis de 590mujeres. Archivos Españoles de Urología (Edimpresa). 2009 Mar;62(2):115–23.

  3. McAninch J, Lue T. Urolgía General Smith yTanagho. México: McGraw-Hill; 2014. 758 p.

  4. Thomas JA, Tubaro A, Barber N, d’AnconaF, Muir G, Witzsch U, et al. A MulticenterRandomized Noninferiority Trial ComparingGreenLight-XPS Laser Vaporization of theProstate and Transurethral Resection ofthe Prostate for the Treatment of BenignProstatic Obstruction: Two-yr Outcomes of theGOLIATH Study. Eur Urol. 2016;69(1):94–102.doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.054

  5. Mavuduru RM, Mandal AK, Singh SK, AcharyaN, Agarwal M, Garg S, et al. Comparison ofHoLEP and TURP in terms of efficacy in theearly postoperative period and perioperativemorbidity. Urol Int. 2009;82(2):130–5. doi:https://doi.org/10.1159/000200786

  6. Kim M, Lee H-E, Oh S-J. Technical aspectsof holmium laser enucleation of the prostatefor benign prostatic hyperplasia. Korean JUrol. 2013 Sep;54(9):570–9. doi: https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2013.54.9.570

  7. Zhang Z-H, Luo F, Su Y-H, Li J. Management ofgreenlight laser plus transurethral resection ofprostate for elderly men. Medicine (Baltimore).2018 Aug;97(33):e11862. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011862

  8. Stone BV, Chughtai B, Kaplan SA, Te AE, LeeRK. GreenLight laser for prostates over 100 ml:what is the evidence? Curr Opin Urol. 2016Jan;26(1):28–34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/mou.0000000000000237

  9. Sun I, Yoo S, Park J, Cho SY, Jeong H, SonH, et al. Quality of life after photo-selectivevaporization and holmium-laser enucleation ofthe prostate: 5-year outcomes. Sci Rep. 2019Jun 4;9(1):8261. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44686-2

  10. Chughtai B, Forde JC, Thomas DDM, Laor L,Hossack T, Woo HH, et al. Benign prostatichyperplasia. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016 May5;2:16031. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2016.31

  11. Platz EA, Joshu CE, Mondul AM, Peskoe SB,Willett WC, Giovannucci E. Incidence andProgression of Lower Urinary Tract Symptomsin a Large Prospective Cohort of US Men. J Urol.2012 Aug;188(2):496–501. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.juro.2012.03.125

  12. Bosch JLHR, Hop WCJ, Kirkels WJ, SchröderFH. Natural history of benign prostatichyperplasia: Appropriate case definition andestimation of its prevalence in the community.Urology. 1995 Sep 1;46(3):34–40. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80248-9

  13. Jin B, Turner L, Zhou Z, Zhou EL, HandelsmanDJ. Ethnicity and migration as determinants ofhuman prostate size. J Clin Endocrinol Metab.1999 Oct;84(10):3613–9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1210/jcem.84.10.6041




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com