Surgical Reintervention Rate after Prostatic Urethral Lift: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Involving over 2,000 Patients.

PURPOSE: The surgical reintervention rate after prostatic urethral lift is not well characterized but has been estimated at 2% to 3% per year. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the surgical reintervention rate after prostatic urethral lift. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE®, Embase® and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies of men treated with prostatic urethral lift reporting at least 1 year of maximum followup data. We performed a random effects meta-analysis to estimate the annual rate of surgical reintervention after prostatic urethral lift, including those performed for lower urinary tract symptoms or involving device explant, additions or replacement. The robustness of the meta-analysis conclusions was evaluated in a one-study removed analysis and heterogeneity was investigated with a subgroup analysis. RESULTS: In 11 studies (2,016 patients) 153 surgical reinterventions were performed, among which transurethral resection of the prostate/laser (51.0%), repeat prostatic urethral lift (32.7%) and device explant (19.6%) were most common. The annual rate of surgical reintervention was 6.0% per year (95% CI 3.0-8.9). These results were not significantly influenced by any single study. The annual rate of surgical intervention was significantly influenced by the mean duration of patient followup. Surgical reintervention rates were 4.3% per year in studies with 1 year or less mean followup, 10.7% per year in studies with more than 1 year to 3 years mean followup and 5.8% per year in a single study with more than 3 years mean followup (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The surgical reintervention rate with prostatic urethral lift is 6.0% per year and is higher in studies with longer followup durations.

Penile blood pressure is useful to identify candidates for tadalafil treatment in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether penile blood pressure (PBP) can be used to identify patients who can benefit from tadalafil treatment, the correlation between PBP at baseline and changes in lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) induced by tadalafil treatment was studied prospectively. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with BPH who were poor responders to α1 -blockers and took tadalafil instead of an α1 -blocker were registered between 2014 and 2016. The patients were divided into two groups (low- and high-PBP groups) using the median baseline PBP of 110 mmHg as the threshold. The changes in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) between before and at 4 and 12 weeks after tadalafil treatment were compared between the low- and high-PBP groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify parameters associated with IPSS improvement with tadalafil treatment. RESULTS: In all, 51 patients were investigated. The IPSS in the low-PBP group decreased immediately after the start of treatment, and there was significant improvement in the IPSS from baseline at 4 and 12 weeks after the start of treatment, whilst the IPSS in the high-PBP group did not show significant changes. On multivariate analysis, PBP at baseline, anticholinergic drug use, and IPSS at baseline were significant predictors of a good IPSS response to tadalafil treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that PBP could reliably identify patients with BPH who could benefit from tadalafil treatment. Patients with low PBP could be better responders to tadalafil.

WATER II (80-150 mL) procedural outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To present early safety and feasibility data from a multicentre prospective study (WATER II) of aquablation in the treatment of symptomatic men with large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Between September and December 2017, 101 men with moderate-to-severe BPH symptoms and prostate volume of 80-150 mL underwent aquablation in a prospective multicentre international clinical trial. Baseline demographics and standardized postoperative management variables were carefully recorded in a central independently monitored database. Surgeons answered analogue scale questionnaires on intra-operative technical factors and postoperative management. Adverse events up to 1 month were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee. RESULTS: The mean (range) prostate volume was 107 (80-150) mL. The mean (range) operating time was 37 (15-97) min and aquablation resection time was 8 (3-15) min. Adequate adenoma resection was achieved with a single pass in 34 patients and with additional passes in 67 patients (mean 1.8 treatment passes), all in a single operating session. Haemostasis was achieved using either a Foley balloon catheter placed in the bladder under traction (n = 98, mean duration 18 h) or direct tamponade using a balloon inflated in the prostate fossa (n = 3, mean duration 15 h). No patient required electrocautery for haemostasis at the time of the primary procedure. The mean length of stay after the procedure was 1.6 days (range same day to 6 days). The Clavien-Dindo grade ≥2 event rate observed at 1 month was 29.7%. Bleeding complications were recorded in 10 patients (9.9%) during the index procedure hospitalization prior to discharge, and included six (5.9%) peri-operative transfusions. CONCLUSIONS: Aquablation is feasible and safe in treating men with men with large prostates (80-150 mL). The 6-month efficacy data are being accrued and will be presented in future publications (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03123250).

Aquablation of the prostate: a review and update.

INTRODUCTION: Invasive procedures, such as transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), have long been the gold standard therapy for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In recent years, newer treatment modalities have arisen, such as Aquablation, with similar efficacy and improved adverse event profiles, with particular emphasis on postoperative sexual function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Aquablation is a new technology that utilizes machine-controlled water jets to ablate the soft tissue of the prostate as determined by the doctor. In this review, we will discuss the techniques currently being used to complete this procedure, the outcomes and safety, and finally, the long term data as well as the adverse events associated with Aquablation. RESULTS: Aquablation is rapidly effective in treating patients with LUTS due to BPH. Critically, in head to head comparison with TURP, Aquablation has equivalent objective results with much shorter resections times, and significantly less sexual side effects. Currently, the literature only reports results extending to 12 months post-procedure, and therefore long term durability of results beyond this time point remains unknown. CONCLUSIONS: Aquablation is a safe and effective option for treating LUTS secondary to BPH. Aquablation is a new surgical option that shows very promising short term results, in particular, due to its short resection time regardless of gland size and low rate of sexual side effects. This technology still requires further investigation to confirm durability and efficacy over time.

Office-based therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a review and update.

INTRODUCTION: Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common conditions affecting the aging man. Over the years, various treatment modalities with distinct efficacy and safety profiles have emerged in experimental and clinical use. However, only a handful have gained in popularity and stood the test of time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We provide an update on minimally invasive treatment modalities for BPH, specifically focused on office-based procedures namely the prostatic urethral lift (UroLift) and the convective water vapor ablation therapy (Rezum). RESULTS: Both the UroLift and Rezum have demonstrated excellent efficacy and durability in relieving LUTS in the BPH patient. When compared to the gold standard TURP, these novel therapies can also be performed as an outpatient procedure under local anesthesia, which allows for decreased hospitalization, operative and catheterization times, subsequently allowing for increased cost savings. Moreover, these procedures have no discernable adverse effects on postoperative sexual function, making it a desirable treatment option for many patients. CONCLUSIONS: Both the UroLift and Rezum are minimally invasive treatment options capable of providing rapid, significant and durable relief of LUTS secondary to BPH. They demonstrate comparable efficacy to TURP with the added advantage of preserving sexual function and decreasing patient morbidity and healthcare costs.

Photoselective vaporization of the prostate: application, outcomes and safety.

INTRODUCTION: Open prostatectomy and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has been the gold standard therapy for moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In recent years, laser vaporization technologies have now been recognized by international guidelines as an effective treatment alternative to TURP for treating BPH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this contemporary review, we aim to discuss the application, outcomes and safety of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP), specifically with the GreenLight laser. We also discuss the properties and evolution of the GreenLight laser as understanding the basic principles of this laser system. RESULTS: GreenLight PVP is a durable and effective alternative to TURP, especially in high-risk patients on systemic anticoagulation. Aside from providing similar efficacy and safety, the GreenLight PVP also allows for decreased hospitalization times, catheterization times and subsequently decreased healthcare costs. The latest generation laser, 180W XPS system, is found to be more cost-effective and efficacious in tissue vaporization when compared to previous laser generations. CONCLUSIONS: Laser vaporization is a safe and effective option to treating LUTS secondary to BPH. A patient-centered approach considering patient preference and preoperative parameters should be employed to determine the ideal treatment option for each individual patient.

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP): a review and update.

INTRODUCTION: Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common diseases affecting the aging man, with almost 80% of men greater than 70 affected. Historically, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has been considered the historical gold standard in the treatment of LUTS due to BPH for many years, contemporary literature indicates that holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) has replaced TURP and open simple prostatectomy as the size independent surgical gold standard for BPH treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this review, we discuss the current techniques utilized, outcomes and safety, as well as the long term durability of results. Adverse events associated with the HoLEP procedure, both enucleation and morcellation, are covered as well. RESULTS: HoLEP has a robust body of literature supporting the technique, which demonstrates its ability to surpass other surgical BPH procedures, including TURP and open simple prostatectomy. Additionally, there is long term durability of both subjective and objective outcomes greater than 10 years associated with this procedure. One randomized trial showed specific postoperative outcome measures that were superior to TURP at 7 years of follow up, including Qmax (4.36 mL/s improvement), erectile function (2.39 points improvement on the IIEF erectile function section), and weight of prostate removed (15.7 grams greater), while other studies have shown greater reduction in postoperative PSA, lower detrusor pressure at Qmax, and more. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, HoLEP has proven to be an extremely durable and effective treatment for patients suffering from LUTS due to BPH. Both the Europeans and AUA guidelines on the surgical treatment of BPH recommend HoLEP as a size-independent treatment option for those men with moderate to severe symptoms. HoLEP is an excellent option for many patients who may not be good candidates for other procedures based on prostate size, age, or bleeding risk.

Application of 180W XPS GreenLight laser vaporization of the prostate for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety, efficacy and clinical outcomes after photovaporization of the prostate with the 180W-XPS Greenlight laser in patients with low urinary tracts symptom secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All 102 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms who underwent 180W XPS laser vaporization of the prostate from April 2017 to April 2018 were enrolled. The preoperative parameters, postoperative functional, uroflowmetry outcomes and complications were collected. RESULTS: All patients were successfully treated with 180W XPS laser vaporization. Mean preoperative prostate volume was 81±28.7 ml and mean laser time was 28.2±12.5 minutes. No major complications intraoperatively or postoperatively were observed and no blood transfusions were required. Comparing to preoperative characteristics, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax) and post-void residual (PVR) parameters were improved significantly and sustained during the follow-up period. At 3, 6 and 12-month follow-ups, mean urinary peak flow increased from 6.2±2.1 ml per second to 19.8±4.6, 19.4±4.7 and 19.6±4.9 ml per second, respectively. Mean International Prostate Symptom Scores decreased over time, from 28.9±4.5 to 8.2±1.6, 6.2±1.22 and 5.88±1.15 at 3, 6, 12 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: 180W XPS Greenlight laser vaporization is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to BPH.

Prostate artery Embolisation Assessment of Safety and feasibilitY (P-EASY): a potential alternative to long-term medical therapy for benign prostate hyperplasia.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety, short-term efficacy and early functional results of prostate artery embolisation (PAE), an emerging minimally invasive treatment for symptomatic benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 51 men with BPH (prostate size >40 mL) causing moderate-severe lower urinary tract symptoms, who had either failed or ceased medical therapy and had declined or were considered unsuitable for surgical intervention, were recruited to this study. All men underwent baseline clinical assessment, PAE, and 3-month follow-up. The primary endpoints of this study were safety and feasibility. Safety was measured by the incidence of post-PAE adverse events and feasibility was defined by technical success. Secondary endpoints were changes in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL) score at 3 months after PAE. RESULTS: There were no serious adverse events and all procedures were technically successful. For non-catheterised patients, improvement in IPSS and QoL was reported in 95.1% of cases (P < 0.001). The mean reductions in IPSS and QoL were 18.8 points (80.7%) (P < 0.001) and 3.8 points (80.6%) (P < 0.001), respectively. Of the 30 non-indwelling-catheter-dependent men on medical therapy, 23 men were able to completely cease all medications, with all but one of the remaining men reporting significant improvements in IPSS and QoL score. CONCLUSION: PAE is a technically feasible and safe procedure, with excellent short-term efficacy. High rates of patient satisfaction were achieved in this study, along with significant reductions in prostate symptoms and improvements in QoL. PAE may be an alternative to long-term use of medical therapy for symptoms due to BPH.

Prostatic artery embolization for benign prostatic obstruction: assessment of safety and efficacy.

PURPOSE: Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has seen a recent increase in interest as a treatment for men with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). The appeal of this intervention lies in reported reduction in morbidity and its minimally invasive nature. The purpose of this review is to assess the safety and efficacy of PAE as a new treatment in BPO and explore risks surrounding its performance. METHODS: A review of the literature was performed. Medical databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, limited to English, peer-reviewed articles. Search terms included prostatic artery embolization, lower urinary tracts symptoms, minimally invasive therapies, interventional radiology prostate, and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Articles were screened by two independent reviewers for content on development, methods, outcomes, and complications of PAE. RESULTS: Suitability of patients to undergo PAE depends on review of patient history, pre-procedure visualisation of appropriate vascular anatomy and clinical parameters. Despite this selection of candidates favourable for procedural success, PAE is not without risk of complications, some of which can significantly affect patient quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Although initial findings show promise regarding safety and efficacy of PAE in improving symptom and quality-of-life scores, further investigation is required to establish durability of effect and the appropriate use of this experimental modality. There is currently limited robust evidence for the beneficial outcomes of PAE. Long-term follow-up studies will add to the evidence base to help further assess the feasibility of this procedure as an alternative to TURP.

Fexapotide triflutate: results of long-term safety and efficacy trials of a novel injectable therapy for symptomatic prostate enlargement.

PURPOSE: These studies were undertaken to determine if fexapotide triflutate 2.5 mg transrectal injectable (FT) has significant long-term (LT) safety and efficacy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Two placebo controlled double-blind randomized parallel group trials with 995 BPH patients at 72 sites treated 3:2 FT:placebo, with open-label FT crossover (CO) re-injection in 2 trials n = 344 and long-term follow-up (LF) 2-6.75 years (mean 3.58 years, median 3.67 years; FT re-injection CO mean 4.27 years, median 4.42 years) were evaluated. 12 months post-treatment patients elected no further treatment, approved oral medications, FT, or interventional treatment. Primary endpoint variable was change in Symptom Score (IPSS) at 12 months and at LF. CO primary co-endpoints were 3-year incidence of (1) surgery for BPH in FT treated CO patients versus patients crossed over to oral BPH medications and (2) surgery or acute urinary retention in FT-treated CO placebo patients versus placebo patients crossed over to oral BPH medications. 28 CO secondary endpoints assessed surgical and symptomatic outcomes in FT reinjected patients versus conventional BPH medication CO and control subgroups at 2 and 3 years. RESULTS: FT injection had no significant safety differences from placebo. LF IPSS change from baseline was higher in FT treated patients compared to placebo (median FT group improvement - 5.2 versus placebo - 3.0, p < 0.0001). LF incidence of AUR (1.08% p = 0.0058) and prostate cancer (PCa) (1.1% p = 0.0116) were both reduced in FT treated patients. LF incidence of intervention for BPH was reduced in the FT group versus oral BPH medications (8.08% versus 27.85% at 3 years, p < 0.0001). LF incidence of intervention or AUR in placebo CO group with FT versus placebo CO group with oral medications was reduced (6.07% versus 33.3% at 3 years, p < 0.0001). 28/28 secondary efficacy endpoints were reached in LF CO re-injection studies. CONCLUSIONS: FT 2.5 mg is a safe and effective transrectal injectable for LT treatment of BPH. FT treated patients also had reduced need for BPH intervention, and reduced incidence of PCa and AUR.

The role of urodynamics in the surgical management of benign prostatic obstruction.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) is a common cause of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in elderly men. However, such symptoms are often caused by primary detrusor overactivity or underactivity. Surgical management where BPO is absent or merely incidental has a lower chance of success, and exposes the patient to the potential complications of surgery. This review discusses the diagnostic challenges facing this common presentation. RECENT FINDINGS: Most evidence comes from small, historical prospective cohort studies. A Cochrane review found only two studies that met the prespecified inclusion criteria. It concluded that urodynamics changed decision-making regarding surgery for LUTS but it was not possible to determine whether this impacted upon outcome. A systematic review of several noninvasive alternatives to urodynamics could not recommend any of them over urodynamic pressure-flow study assessment. Further research is currently in progress, the 'UPSTREAM' study, which is a randomized, multicentre trial. Men are randomized to undergo investigation with clinical evaluation and uroflowmetry, or to additionally receive urodynamics. The primary aim is to determine the impact of urodynamics on the assessment pathway. SUMMARY: Assessment of BPO involves determining whether it has a contributory role in individual patients. This is a crucial factor in outcome, as surgery can give poor results if the symptoms are principally caused by detrusor dysfunction (overactivity or underactivity). Urodynamics can help determine this if undertaken to a suitable standard. Further research will identify the precise role of this test modality.

Naftopidil for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms compatible with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

BACKGROUND: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common condition in ageing men that may cause lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Treatment aims are to relieve symptoms and prevent disease-related complications. Naftopidil is an alpha-blocker (AB) that has a high affinity for the A1d receptor that may have advantages in treating LUTS in this setting. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2009. Since that time, several large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported, making this update relevant. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of naftopidil for the treatment of LUTS associated with BPH. SEARCH METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, LILAC, and Web of Science), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings with no restrictions on the language of publication or publication status up to 31 May 2018 SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all parallel RCTs. We also included cross-over design trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and interpreted them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Primary outcomes were urological symptom scores, quality of life (QoL) and treatment withdrawals for any reason; secondary outcomes were treatment withdrawals due to adverse events, acute urinary retention, surgical intervention for BPH, and cardiovascular and sexual adverse events. We considered outcomes measured up to 12 months after randomisation as short term, and later than 12 months as long term. We rated the certainty of the evidence according to the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 22 RCTs with 2223 randomised participants across four comparisons for short-term follow-up. This abstract focuses on only two of four comparisons for which we found data since two comparators (i.e. propiverine and Eviprostat (phytotherapy)) are rarely used. One study comparing naftopidil to placebo did not report any relevant outcomes and was therefore excluded. There were no trials that compared to combination therapy with naftopidil or any 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) to combination therapy with other ABs and any 5-ARIs.All included studies were conducted in Asian countries. Study duration ranged from four to 12 weeks. Mean age was 67.8 years, prostate volume was 35.4 mL, and International Prostate Symptom Score was 18.3. We were unable to perform any of the preplanned subgroup analyses based on age and baseline symptom score.Naftopidil versus tamsulosinBased on 12 studies with 965 randomised participants, naftopidil may have resulted in little or no difference in urological symptom score (mean difference (MD) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.09 to 1.04 measured on a scale from 0 to 35 with higher score representing increased symptoms), QoL (MD 0.11, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.30; measured on a scale from 0 to 6 with higher scores representing worse QoL), and treatment withdrawals for any reason (risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.34; corresponding to 7 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% CI 32 fewer to 31 more). Naftopidil may have resulted in little to no difference in sexual adverse events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.22); this would result in 26 fewer sexual adverse events per 1000 participants (95% CI 43 fewer to 13 more). We rated the certainty of evidence as moderate for urological symptom score and low for the other outcomes.Naftopidil versus silodosinBased on five studies with 652 randomised participants, naftopidil may have resulted in little or no difference in the urological symptom scores (MD 1.04, 95% CI -0.78 to 2.85), QoL (MD 0.21, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.66), and treatment withdrawals for any reason (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.23; corresponding to 26 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% CI 62 fewer to 32 more). We rated the certainty of evidence as low for all these outcomes. Naftopidil likely reduced sexual adverse events (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.42; corresponding to 126 fewer sexual adverse events per 1000 participants, 95% CI 139 fewer to 86 fewer). We rated the certainty of evidence as moderate for sexual adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Naftopidil appears to have similar effects in the urological symptom scores and QoL compared to tamsulosin and silodosin. Naftopidil has similar sexual adverse events compared to tamsulosin but has fewer compared to silodosin.

Effects of Calcium Oxalate on Expression of Clusterin and Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Prostatitis and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patients with Calculi.

BACKGROUND Prostatic calculi are common in urological treatments. Our major purpose in the present study was to explore the occurrence and composition of prostatic calculi, and investigate the effect of calcium oxalate (CaOx) on clusterin expression and lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) in prostatitis and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients with calculi. MATERIAL AND METHODS From December 2016 to January 2017, a total of 79 prostatitis patients aged more than 50 years were enrolled. The patients were divided into 3 groups: group A had small calculi (discrete, small echoes); group B had large calculi (large masses of multiple echoes, much coarser), and group C had no calculi. Immunohistochemical analysis was performed to evaluate the tissue scores. The clusterin expression was detected by quantitative real-time CR (qRT-PCR), Western blot, and immunofluorescence. RESULTS According to multifactor analysis, age was significantly associated with prostatic calculus. The composition of prostatic calculus was an independent factor of LUTS. The clusterin expression was elevated in group B. The mRNA and protein levels of clusterin in prostatitis and BPH patients with stones were obviously higher than those in prostatitis and BPH patients without stones. CaOx enhanced clusterin expression in a dose-dependent manner. CONCLUSIONS Large prostatic calculi were associated with LUST. Furthermore, CaOx enhanced clusterin expression, leading to large prostatic calculi. These results may provide a therapeutic strategy for prostatitis and BPH.

A prospective, randomized trial comparing thulium vapoenucleation with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction: perioperative safety and efficacy.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the perioperative outcomes of thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for patients with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). METHODS: Forty-eight and 46 patients were prospectively randomized to ThuVEP and HoLEP. All patients were assessed preoperatively and 4-week postoperatively. The complications were noted and classified according to the modified Clavien classification system. Patient data were expressed as median (interquartile range) or numbers (%). RESULTS: Median age at surgery was 73 (67-76) years and median prostate volume was 80 (46.75-100) cc and not different between the groups (p = 0.207). The median operative time was 60 (41-79) minutes without significant differences between both groups (p = 0.275). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding catheterization time [2 (2-2) days, p = 0.966] and postoperative stay [2 (2-3) days, p = 0.80]). Clavien 1 (13.8%), Clavien 2 (3.2%), Clavien 3a (2.1%), and Clavien 3b (4.3%) complications occurred without significant differences between the groups. However, the occurrence of acute postoperative urinary retention was higher after HoLEP compared to ThuVEP (15.2 vs. 2.1%, p ≤ 0.022). At 1-month follow-up, peak urinary flow rates (10.7 vs. 22 ml/s), post-void residual volumes (100 vs. 20 ml), International Prostate Symptom Score (20 vs. 10) and Quality of Life (4 vs. 3) had improved significantly (p ≤ 0.005) without significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: ThuVEP and HoLEP are safe and effective procedures for the treatment of symptomatic BPO. Both procedures give equivalent and satisfactory immediate micturition improvement with low perioperative morbidity.

Use of thermobalancing therapy in ageing male with benign prostatic hyperplasia with a focus on etiology and pathophysiology.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated if "thermobalancing" therapy (TT), using Dr Allen's therapeutic device (DATD) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), can aid in understanding the etiology and pathophysiology of BPH. METHODS: We compared urinary and other parameters of BPH patients who received TT over 6 months (treatment group) with those of healthy volunteers who had not received the treatment (control group). Dynamics of symptoms and indicators in each group were evaluated in comparison with their data at the beginning and end of the study. Parameters were the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) for urinary symptoms and quality of life (QoL), ultrasound measurement of prostate volume (PV) and uroflowmetry (maximum flow rate, Qmax). TT effectiveness was examined in 124 men with BPH and PV <60 mL. We also investigated the data of five patients with BPH and PV >60 mL. RESULTS: TT decreased urinary symptoms and PV, increased Qmax and improved QoL in men with BPH, PV <60 mL, and in men with BPH, PV >60 mL. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated that TT is effective for BPH, suggesting that blood circulation plays a crucial role in its cause. The continuous heat exposure that does not exceed the normal body temperature terminates the trigger of BPH development, "micro-focus" of hypothermia, and the following spontaneous expansion of capillaries. TT could be considered to be a useful tool in BPH treatment.

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

INTRODUCTION: To report the five year results of a prospective, multi-center, randomized, blinded sham control trial of the Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) in men with bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: At 19 centers in North America and Australia, 206 subjects ≥ 50 years old with International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS ) > 12, peak flow rate (Qmax) ≤ 12 mL/s, and prostate volume 30 cc-80 cc were randomized 2:1 to the PUL procedure or blinded sham control. In PUL permanent UroLift implants are placed to hold open the lateral lobes of the prostate to reduce urinary obstruction. After randomized comparison at 3 months and the only opportunity to add more PUL implants, PUL patients were followed to 5 years. LUTS severity (IPSS), quality of life (QOL), BPH Impact Index (BPHII), Qmax, sexual function, and adverse events were assessed throughout follow up. RESULTS: IPSS improvement after PUL was 88% greater than that of sham at 3 months. LUTS and QOL were significantly improved by 2 weeks with return to preoperative physical activity within 8.6 days. Improvement in IPSS, QOL, BPHII, and Qmax were durable through 5 years with improvements of 36%, 50%, 52%, and 44% respectively. No difference was seen between Intent to Treat and Per Protocol populations. Surgical retreatment was 13.6% over 5 years. Adverse events were mild to moderate and transient. Sexual function was stable over 5 years with no de novo, sustained erectile or ejaculatory dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: PUL offers rapid improvement in symptoms, QOL and flow rate that is durable to 5 years. These improvements were achieved with minimal use of a postoperative urinary catheter, rapid return to normal, and preservation of both erectile and ejaculatory function. Symptom improvement was commensurate with patient satisfaction. PUL offers a minimally invasive option in the treatment of LUTS due to BPH.

State of the art: Advanced techniques for prostatic urethral lift for the relief of prostate obstruction under local anesthesia.

Benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) affects an estimated 60% of men over the age of 50 and 90% of men over the age of 80. The prostatic urethral lift (PUL) is a safe and effective office-based procedure that is used worldwide for the treatment of BPH in men who are dissatisfied with medications due to side effects or lack of efficacy or don't want to have a transurethral resection of the prostate due to the side effects and invasiveness of the procedure. In 2012 Barkin et al, published the standard technique for the delivery of the Urolift implant. The objective of this article is to describe the current state of the art advanced techniques for the delivery of the UroLift implant.

[Validation of visual prostate symptom score, VPSS, in the evaluation of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (550 patients)]. / Validation du score visuel prostatique en images SVPI dans l'évaluation des symptômes du bas appareil urinaire associés à une hyperplasie bénigne de la prostate (550 patients).

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to validate the VPSS (visual prostatic symptom score) score in the French language for the identification and monitoring of BPH-related LUTS in urological practice. METHODS: A prospective observational survey was carried out between September the 15th 2014 and July the 30th 2015 in urology practices. The first 4 consecutive patients aged over 60 years, with BPH-related LUTS requiring prescription of an alpha-blocker, were enrolled. We translated a "visual prostatic symptom score" (VPSS) into French and adapted it slightly. At the first visit and follow-up visit (1-3 months after the first visit), the patient completed 2 questionnaires: the French language version of the IPSS and the VPSS. RESULTS: Of the urologists contacted, 169 enrolled at least one patient and returned information; 550 questionnaires were included in the statistical analysis. The median IPSS and VPSS total scores, subscores and quality of life scores all decreased significantly (P<0.0001) between enrolment and the follow-up visit 1-3 months later. Correlations between the IPSS and VPSS at enrolment and the follow-up visit and their variation were all significant. Total VPSS was significantly correlated with total IPSS, as were the irritative, obstructive and quality of life subscores evaluated on the corresponding pictograms. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed the VPSS to be a simple and useful tool for identifying and monitoring BPH-related LUTS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.