An international delphi survey and consensus meeting to define the risk factors for ureteral stricture after endoscopic treatment for urolithiasis.

PURPOSE: Iatrogenic ureteral strictures (US) after endoscopic treatment for urolithiasis represent a significant healthcare concern. However, high-quality evidence on the risk factors associated with US is currently lacking. We aimed to develop a consensus statement addressing the definition, risk factors, and follow-up management of iatrogenic US after endoscopic treatment for urolithiasis. METHODS: Utilizing a modified Delphi method, a steering committee developed survey statements based on a systematic literature review. Then, a two-round online survey was submitted to 25 experts, offering voting options to assess agreement levels. A consensus panel meeting was held for unresolved statements. The predetermined consensus threshold was set at 70%. RESULTS: The steering committee formulated 73 statements. In the initial survey, consensus was reached on 56 (77%) statements. Following in-depth discussions and refinement of 17 (23%) statements in a consensus meeting, the second survey achieved consensus on 63 (86%) statements. This process underscored agreement on pivotal factors influencing US in endoscopic urolithiasis treatments. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive list of categorized risk factors for US following endoscopic urolithiasis treatments. The objectives include enhancing uniformity in research, minimizing redundancy in outcome assessments, and effectively addressing risk factors associated with US. These findings are crucial for designing future clinical trials and guiding endoscopic surgeons in mitigating the risk of US.

Ureteral stricture rate after endoscopic treatments for urolithiasis and related risk factors: systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: We aimed to accurately determine ureteral stricture (US) rates following urolithiasis treatments and their related risk factors. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines using databases from inception to November 2023. Studies were deemed eligible for analysis if they included ≥ 18 years old patients with urinary lithiasis (Patients) who were subjected to endoscopic treatment (Intervention) with ureteroscopy (URS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), or shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) (Comparator) to assess the incidence of US (Outcome) in prospective and retrospective studies (Study design). RESULTS: A total of 43 studies were included. The pooled US rate was 1.3% post-SWL and 2.1% post-PCNL. The pooled rate of US post-URS was 1.9% but raised to 2.7% considering the last five years' studies and 4.9% if the stone was impacted. Moreover, the pooled US rate differed if follow-ups were under or over six months. Patients with proximal ureteral stone, preoperative hydronephrosis, intraoperative ureteral perforation, and impacted stones showed higher US risk post-endoscopic intervention with odds ratio of 1.6 (P = 0.05), 2.6 (P = 0.009), 7.1 (P < 0.001), and 7.47 (P = 0.003), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The overall US rate ranges from 0.3 to 4.9%, with an increasing trend in the last few years. It is influenced by type of treatment, stone location and impaction, preoperative hydronephrosis and intraoperative perforation. Future standardized reporting and prospective and more extended follow-up studies might contribute to a better understanding of US risks related to calculi treatment.

Recent evidence for anatomic endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) in patients with benign prostatic obstruction on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Due to demographic changes in today's society, the number of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is increasing. Similarly, the proportion of patients with cardiovascular risk factors undergoing antiplatelet (AP) or anticoagulation (AC) therapy is growing as well. METHODS: This review discusses the current literature on various techniques used for anatomic endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) in patients on AC/AP therapy. RESULTS: The large number of energy sources used for AEEP makes it difficult to compare them. Overall, fewer bleeding-associated complications arise in patients under AP compared to AC or bridging therapy with low molecular weight heparin. However, perioperatively both AP and AC therapy lead to a higher risk of bleeding complications compared to patients not taking anticoagulants. CONCLUSIONS: The literature shows that AEEP is possible and efficacious in patients under AC/AP therapy, with only slight differences compared to patients not taking AC/AP drugs, on a short and long-term basis. Nevertheless, the sparse data, the retrospective nature of many studies and the inclusion of prostate sizes between 50 and 110 ml only, make it difficult to come to strong conclusions.

Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP). The same but different-a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Various techniques for EEP exist. They differ by surgical steps and the source of energy. It is assumed that the latter is of minor importance, whereas adherence to the anatomical enucleation template determines the postoperative result. So far, no systematic review highlights the differences between the energy sources in use for anatomical EEP. This study will address selfsame topic. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was completed on September 1st, 2020. Studies comparing HoLEP, ThuLEP, DiLEP, or BipolEP with TUR-P providing 12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. Two frequentist network meta-analyses were created to compare the techniques of EEP indirectly. RESULTS: 31 studies, including 4466 patients, were found eligible for our meta-analysis. Indirect pairwise comparison showed differences in surgery time between BipolEP and HolEP (MD - 16.72 min., 95% CI - 27.75 to - 5.69) and DiLEP and HoLEP (MD - 22.41 min., 95% CI - 39.43 to - 5.39). No differences in the amount of resected prostatic tissue, major and minor complications and postoperative catheterization time were found. The odds for blood transfusions were threefold higher for BipolEP than for HoLEP (OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.02-10.5). The difference was not statistically significant when comparing prospective trials and matched-pair analysis only (OR 3.25, 95% CI 0.94-11.18). The Qmax 12 months after surgery was 2 ml/sec. higher for BipolEP than for DiLEP (MD 2.00, 95% CI 0.17-3.84) and 1.94 ml/sec. lower for DiLEP than for HoLEP (MD - 1.94, 95% CI - 3.65 to - 0.22). CONCLUSION: The energy source used for EEP has an impact on the intervention itself. BipolEP promotes surgical efficiency; laser techniques lower the risk of bleeding. REGISTRY: This meta-analysis is registered in the PROSPERO international prospective register registry with the registration number CRD42020205836.

Reasons to go for thulium-based anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate.

PURPOSE: To summarize the current evidence and the reasons to go for thulium-based anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP). METHODS: This review discusses the available literature on thulium-based AEEP. RESULTS: Thulium lasers operate at a wavelength between 1940 and 2013 nm. This wavelength, which has a low penetration depth in water, allows to perform smooth cuts in the prostatic tissue and allows urologists to perform various procedures: resection, vaporization, enucleation, or vapoenucleation of the prostate. Depending on the type of thulium laser, it can be used either in a continuous, or pulsed mode. CONCLUSION: In recent years, an increasing amount of evidence has described the thulium laser as a minimally invasive and size-independent treatment option for benign prostatic enlargement with excellent long-term results.

Aquablation of the prostate: single-center results of a non-selected, consecutive patient cohort.

PURPOSE: Aquablation of the prostate using the AquaBeam™ system promises equivalent functional outcomes, reduced learning curve, and improved sexual function compared to transurethral prostate resection as shown in prospective randomized trials. This prospective cohort study aims to evaluate if published results can be transferred into the clinical routine in a non-selected patient collective. METHODS: This study includes all patients treated between September 2017 and June 2018 with Aquablation of the prostate. Patients have been evaluated prospectively for the perioperative course and early follow-up. Besides voiding parameter and symptom score, TRUS-volume change, ejaculatory function, and adverse events have been recorded. RESULTS: 118 consecutive patients have been treated in the given time. Aquablation could be carried out successfully in all patients. IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and PVR improved significantly after the procedure and continued to improve during 3-month follow-up. Mean OR time was 20 min, TRUS volume decreased by 65%, and 73% of the patients retained antegrade ejaculation. Thirteen adverse events (> Clavien-Dindo I) occurred in 10 patients. CONCLUSION: The surgical ablation of the prostate using Aquablation achieved significant and immediate improvement of functional voiding parameters Qmax and PVR as well as symptomatic improvement of IPSS and QoL. Aquablation seems to be safe and effective with a low perioperative complication profile even in a non-selected group of patients.

Thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate versus holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for the treatment of large volume prostates: preliminary 6-month safety and efficacy results of a prospective randomized trial.

PURPOSE: We compared the perioperative and postoperative characteristics of thulium vapoenucleation and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for the treatment of large volume benign prostatic hyperplasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 94 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and a median prostate size of 80 (IQR 46.75-100) cc were either randomized to thulium vapoenucleation or holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Patients were assessed preoperatively, 1 and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The median operative time was 60 (IQR 41-79) min without significant differences between the groups. There were no significant differences between the groups regarding catheter time [2 (IQR 2-2) days] and postoperative stay [2 (IQR 2-3) days]. Clavien 1 (13.8%), 2 (3.2%), 3a (2.1%), and Clavien 3b (4.3%) complications occurred without significant differences between the groups. At 6-month follow-up, median maximum flow rate (10.7 vs. 25.9 ml/s), post-void residual urine (100 vs. 6.5 ml), I-PSS (20 vs. 5), quality of life (4 vs. 1), PSA (4.14 vs. 0.71 µg/l), and prostate volume (80 vs. 16 ml) had improved significantly (p < 0.001) compared to baseline without significant differences between the groups. Median PSA decrease was 79.7% (58.8-90.6%) and prostate volume reduction was 74.5% (68.57-87.63%) without differences between the groups. The reoperation rate was zero at 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Thulium vapoenucleation and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate are safe and effective procedures for the treatment of large volume benign prostatic hyperplasia. Both procedures give satisfactory micturition improvement with low morbidity and sufficient prostate volume reduction at 6-month follow-up.

Implementation of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MIP): comparison of the initial learning curve with the later on clinical routine in a tertiary centre.

OBJECTIVE: We report on the comparison of clinical results of the early phase of implementation of minimally invasive PNL (MIP) in a mentor-based approach with the later on clinical routine in a tertiary centre. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2010 until January 2015 MIP was performed in 190 patients. Stone and patient characteristics were recorded in prospective manner. Perioperative complications were recorded within the Clavien-Classification. The first 120 consecutive patients undergoing MIP were evaluated and divided into three groups of 40 patients each. Mentor-based introduction of MIP was done within the first 40 patients (group A). Further patients were treated on routine clinical practice basis (group B and C). Treatment outcome was compared within the three groups. RESULTS: The groups did not significantly differ with regard to patient characteristics, operation time and decline in haemoglobin. In the mentor-based series mean stone size was 21.7 ± 12.6 vs. 15.6 ± 7.9 and 16.1 ± 8.4 mm in group B and C (p = 0.033). Primary stone-free rates were 65, 87.5 and 87.5% for the three groups (p = 0.015). Stone-free rate was higher in smaller and simple stones. Overall, complication rate was 41.7% including 36.7% Clavien grade I and II complications. CONCLUSIONS: MIP can be implemented safe and effectively with mentor-based approach. MIP has a high safety profile, which allows high safety and efficacy of MIP at the time of implementation.

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.

Update on the current evidence for Tm:YAG vapoenucleation of the prostate 2014.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the current role of thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). METHODS: A Medline search for randomized trials, case series, and comparative studies being published since the initial description of the ThuVEP procedure (2009-2014) was performed to assess the safety, the perioperative morbidity, the efficacy, and the durability of the technique. RESULTS: A total of 14 peer-reviewed original articles, seven case series [level of evidence (LOE) 4] and seven comparative studies (LOE 3b), have been identified. ThuVEP has been shown to be a size-independent, safe, efficacious, and durable procedure for the treatment of BPO in large, prospective, and retrospective series (LOE 4/3b). The feasibility and safety of the ThuVEP procedure has also been confirmed in patients at high cardiopulmonary risk on oral anticoagulants (LOE 4). It has also been demonstrated that the erectile function is not impaired by the ThuVEP procedure (LOE 4). However, published ThuVEP series are from very few centers of excellence not exceeding a LOE of 3b. Randomized controlled trials comparing ThuVEP with standard procedures for the treatment of BPO, namely transurethral resection of the prostate, open prostatectomy, or holmium laser enucleation of the prostate, have not been published so far. CONCLUSIONS: ThuVEP appears to be a size-independent, safe, efficacious, and durable procedure for the treatment of BPO (LOE 4/3b). Multicentric PRT are however needed to define the current role of ThuVEP in the armamentarium of minimally invasive transurethral surgery of the prostate.

Safety and effectiveness of Thulium VapoEnucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) in patients on anticoagulant therapy.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of Thulium VapoEnucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) for patients on oral anticoagulants (OA) with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). METHODS: Fifty-six patients, undergoing ThuVEP at two institutions, were evaluated from May 2009 until June 2011. All patients were at high cardiopulmonary risk and presented with a median American Society of Anesthesiology score of 3 [interquartile range (IQR) 2-3]. Thirty-two patients were on aspirin, 8 were on clopidogrel or clopidogrel and aspirin, and 16 on phenprocoumon at the time of surgery. Patient demographic, perioperative, and follow-up data were analyzed. RESULTS: Median prostate volume was 50 (IQR 34-76) cc, and resected tissue weight was 32 (IQR 20-50) g. The median operative time was 61.5 (IQR 40-100.75) min, and the catheter time 2 (IQR 2-3) days. There were no perioperative thromboembolic events. Five patients (8.9%) required a second-look operation in the immediate postoperative course (hemorrhage n = 4, residual adenoma n = 1) and four (7.1%) blood transfusions. Complications within the first 30 days included urinary tract infections (1.7%), urinary retention (3.6%), and delayed bleeding (7.1%). These complications were managed conservatively. At 12-month follow-up, median QoL [5 (IQR 3.75-5) vs. 1 (IQR 1-2)], IPSS [21.5 (IQR 15.5-23.75) vs. 5 (IQR 3-8)], Qmax [7.7 (IQR 6.3-10) vs. 28.3 (IQR 21.25-39.2) ml/s], and postvoiding residual urine [100 (IQR 46-200) vs. 17.5 (IQR 0-36) ml] improved significantly (p < 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Thulium VapoEnucleation of the prostate seems to be a safe and efficacious procedure for the treatment of symptomatic BPO in patients at high cardiopulmonary risk on OA.

[Urinary diversion in old patients (80+ years)]. / Harnableitung beim alten Patienten (80+).

With increasing life expectancy there is also an increased need for the management of older (≥ 80 years) patients with the diagnosis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Radical cystectomy with urinary diversion is the state of the art treatment (with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, as long as the patient is fit enough). Choosing the best urinary diversion with respect to morbidity compared to functionality and quality of life remains a challenge in these patients. Physical age alone is not decisive for making a decision. A thorough preoperative assessment of medical features, physical and cognitive impairments is more important. Older patients are generally provided with an ileal conduit as an incontinent urinary diversion, as the intervention involves reduced operating times and complexity compared to continent urinary diversions; however, in the case of good health status with an adequate life expectancy and sufficient compliance, continent diversions may be considered even in aged candidates. In the case of multimorbid patients with a high perioperative risk, ureterostomy with permanent ureteric stents is an important alternative. Most importantly, a thorough preoperative counselling enables patients to reach an informed decision.

Evaluation of the learning curve for Thulium VapoEnucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) using a mentor-based approach.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the learning curve of Thulium:YAG VapoEnucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) for patients with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) prospectively. METHODS: ThuVEP was performed using the 120 Watt 2 µm continuous wave Thulium:YAG laser. ThuVEP was done by a resident without experience in transurethral prostate surgery (A, n = 32), an experienced endourologist (B, n = 32), and an experienced surgeon in ThuVEP (C, n = 32), who served as the mentor for A/B. Patients were divided into consecutive subgroups of 8 patients to assess the impact of the learning curve on procedure outcome. Patient demographic, perioperative, and 12-month follow-up data were analysed. RESULTS: ThuVEP was successfully completed in all patients. Enucleation efficiency (g/min) differed significantly between surgeon A (0.48 ± 0.3), B (0.7 ± 0.36), and C (1.4 ± 0.67) (p ≤ 0.001). Enucleation efficiency correlated significantly with the weight of resected tissue in surgeon A (r = 0.88), B (r = 0.73), and C (r = 0.79) (p < 0.001). ThuVEP was performed by surgeon A and B with reasonable enucleation, morcellation, and overall operation efficiency after 8-16 procedures. At 12-month follow-up, 68 (71 %) patients were available for review. IPSS, QoL, Qmax, PVR, PSA, and prostate volume improved significantly at follow-up (p ≤ 0.023). Mean PSA/prostate volume reduction was 81.95/74.5, 80.7/79.4, and 87.6/75.9 % in surgeon A, B, and C, respectively. Urethral stricture and bladder neck contracture developed 2 (A = 1, B = 1; 2.1 %) patients and 1 (C, 1 %) patient each, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ThuVEP can be performed with reasonable efficiency even during the initial learning course of the surgeon when closely mentored. Previous experience in the field of endourology is beneficial.

[Processing of medical products in the urological practice]. / Aufbereitung von Medizinprodukten in der urologischen Praxis.

The reprocessing of medical products is an important topic both in urological practices and in hospitals. The complexity is caused by the increasing variety of medical instruments and also by the increasing demands on the legally required quality of the reprocessing. The Robert Koch Institute (RKI) and the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM) have published recommendations for the processing of MD and last updated them in 2012. This article summarizes the legal framework for the reprocessing of medical devices, how medical devices are categorized before the appropriate procedure for reprocessing can be selected and the various steps in the reprocessing. A special focus is placed on medical products that are typically found in urological practices or outpatient departments and are processed there. Furthermore, the necessity of validating the processing method and the required training (expertise) of the personnel are discussed.

[Transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURBT)]. / Transurethrale Resektion von Blasentumoren (TUR-B).

Transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURBT) is the standard of care for the diagnostics and primary treatment of bladder tumors. These are removed by fragmentation using loop diathermy. The resection area is coagulated for hemostasis. An important aspect is always a complete resection with an adequate amount of detrusor muscle in the specimen. Postoperative intravesical instillation of single-shot chemotherapy has been proven to reduce recurrence rates. Methods for improved tumor visualization (particularly photodynamic diagnostics) are used to enhance tumor detection rates particularly in multifocal tumors or carcinoma in situ (CIS). Thus, recurrence and progression rates can be reduced. Depending on the histological examination of the TURBT specimen, follow-up treatment for non-muscle invasive bladder tumors are adjuvant instillation treatment using chemotherapy or Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG), second look TURBT and early cystectomy or for muscle invasive bladder tumors, radical cystectomy or (oncologically subordinate) trimodal treatment with renewed TURBT, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are indicated. Possible complications of TURBT include bleeding with bladder tamponade, extraperitoneal or intraperitoneal bladder perforation and infections of the urogenital tract.

[Safety and efficacy of en bloc vs. conventional transurethral resection of bladder tumors: a meta-analysis and systematic review]. / Sicherheit und Effizienz der en bloc vs. konventionellen transurethralen Resektion von Blasentumoren: eine Metaanalyse und systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: En bloc tumor resection of bladder tumors (ERBT) is a novel alternative procedure to conventional resection of bladder tumor (cTURBT), which might help to address common problems of the standard method, such as inadequate detrusor muscle in specimens, high re-resection rates and high recurrence rates. OBJECTIVE: To analyze current data on ERBT in efficacy and safety compared to cTURBT. DATA SOURCES: PubMed. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent authors identified trials based on keywords and inclusion criteria. A third author was consulted in case of discrepancies. Screening keywords: ERBT, en bloc transurethral resection of bladder tumor, TURBT en bloc. A meta-analysis of 13 studies was performed. The effect size was estimated based on odds ratios and mean differences including their corresponding two-sided 95% confidence intervals. DATA SYNTHESIS: The analyzed studies comprised a homogenous collective in terms of tumor size, tumor multiplicity and tumor stage. Operation time did not significantly differ between the methods. Differences were observed in hospitalization and catheterization time in favor of ERBT. Reported complications did not show clear differences. There was significantly more detrusor muscle in the specimens in the ERBT group. No significant differences were found in recurrence up to 2 years of follow-up. CONCLUSION: ERBT is a safe alternative to conventional TURBT with promising features regarding effective resection of detrusor muscle. More standardized data on recurrence rates, different resection modalities and resection margin results are needed.

Thulium: YAG 2 mum cw laser prostatectomy: where do we stand?

INTRODUCTION: Tm:YAG 2 mum cw laser prostatectomy was introduced in the treatment of benign ptostatic obstruction (BPO). Since then numerous studies have been published proving efficacy during follow-up. However, different surgical techniques were introduced with different names for similar techniques that complicate comparison. This reviews aim was to compare published data and break down surgical techniques to core points. The authors define validate appellations for different surgical techniques and propose further use of these names to ensure homogenous nomenclature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All publications on Thulium:YAG prostatectomy have been included in this review. Articles were reviewed and associated due to the nature of the surgical approach. A systematic review of published data was performed. RESULTS: Sixteen peer-reviewed publications dealing with Tm:YAG laser prostatectomy were printed since 2005. Four different surgical principles are described, including vaporization, resection and enucleation. Follow-up, up to 24 months, showed durable functional results. CONCLUSION: Efficacy of Tm:YAG prostatectomy was shown. Surgical techniques include "Tm:YAG Vaporization of the prostate (ThuVAP)", "Tm:YAG VapoResection of the prostate (ThuVaRP)" and "Tm:YAG VapoEnucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP)". The almost blunt enucleation is introduced as "Tm:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP)". The authors recommend the use of this neologism in the future. Further, large-scale prospective studies are needed to prove long-term durability. To initiate and canalize these upcoming studies, the Urothulium Study Group was founded, combining international experts on Thulium:YAG laser prostatectomy under its roof.

Feasibility and efficacy of Thulium:YAG laser enucleation (VapoEnucleation) of the prostate.

PURPOSE: Thulium:YAG (Tm:YAG) vaporesection has been introduced and efficiency was shown on smaller prostates. Criticism mainly referred to prolonged operation time in larger prostates, which appears to be a potential limitation compared to HoLEP. Aim of the study was to evaluate feasibility and efficiency of Tm:YAG VapoEnucleation in larger prostates. METHODS: VapoEnucleation was performed using a 70 W continuous wave-laser. After enucleation tissue was morcellated within the bladder. Prospectively assessed outcomes were improvement in urodynamic parameter and the intra- and postoperative course. Complications were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 88 consecutive patients with prostatic enlargement underwent VapoEnucleation. Prostatic volume was 61.3 +/- 24.0 cc (30-160). OR-time was 72 min +/- 26.6 (35-144) and laser-time 32.4 +/- 10.1 min (16.3-59.3). Applied laser energy was 123.7 +/- 40.6 kJ (67.8-240.9). An average of 31.7 +/- 18.3 g of tissue was retrieved. Pathology revealed four patients with incidental carcinoma. Foley catheter-time was 2 days and the suprapubic tube, if placed, was removed on the third postoperative day on average. Twelve complications were recorded, including bleeding (3), urinary tract infection (6), second-look procedure, due to insufficient deobstruction (2). Re-catherization after successful initial voiding trial was necessary in one patient. Mean peak flow rate improved from 3.5 +/- 4.7 to 19.8 +/- 11.6 ml/s and post-voiding residual urine decreased from 121.4 +/- 339.9 to 22.4 +/- 32.7 ml. CONCLUSION: The functional outcomes demonstrate efficiency of Tm:YAG VapoEnucleation for patients with larger prostates. From our experience, learning curve in VapoEnucleation is short and complications are minimal. Theoretically, no limitation in prostate size occurs. Long-term follow-up is needed to prove durability.

Effect of testosterone, raloxifene and estrogen replacement on the microstructure and biomechanics of metaphyseal osteoporotic bones in orchiectomized male rats.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, osteoporosis research is rarely undertaken in males but an increase in male life expectancy in the company of hypogonadism suggests the necessity for potential therapeutic options. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, the changes in bone structure under standardized testosterone- (T), raloxifene- (R) and estrogen (E)-supplemented diets were analyzed in osteoporotic castrated male rats. RESULTS: Unexpected biomechanical results could be only explained by the histomorphometry, but not by BMD measurements obtained from the qCT. All tested substances showed a significant improvement in the trabecular network (trabecular bone area for C: 2.55 mm(2), T: 4.25 mm(2), R: 4.22 mm(2) and E: 4.28 mm(2)), and suggests that the bone structure was preserved. For the metaphyseal cortical bone, a significant loss was detected in T (CBP: 18.7%) compared to R (CBP: 30.0%), E (CBP: 26.8%) and even to the osteoporotic control (CBP: 28.6%). This explains the observed early mechanical final failure after T supplementation. However, due to the preserved trabecular bone in T, the occurrence of the first microfractures (yL: 49 +/- 21.4 N) was significantly later than in the osteoporotic control (yL: 39.5 +/- 15.5 N). Raloxifene performed well in hindering the bone loss associated with osteoporosis. However, its effect (yL: 83.3 +/- 16.5 N) did not approach the protective effect of E (yL: 99.2 +/- 21.1 N). CONCLUSION: Testosterone only preserved the deterioration of the trabecular bone but not of the cortical bone. Raloxifene prevented the bone loss associated with osteoporosis at all bony structures. This effect did not approach the protective effect of estrogen on trabecular bone, but it is more suitable for male individuals because it has no feminizing effects on the subject.