How I Do It: Transperineal prostate biopsy using local anesthetic in an outpatient setting.

Transperineal prostate biopsy (TPPB) is proven to be an effective diagnostic tool for prostate cancer detection. It allows satisfactory sampling of apical and anterior areas which is not well achieved with the transrectal route, without the associated risks of urinary tract infection or sepsis. The main objective of this paper is to describe the technique utilized in our institution to perform transperineal prostate biopsy under local anesthetic in the outpatient clinic setting.

Five-year outcomes for Aquablation therapy compared to TURP: results from a double-blind, randomized trial in men with LUTS due to BPH.

INTRODUCTION: To determine if Aquablation therapy can maintain long term effectiveness in treating men with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with a baseline prostate volume between 30 and 80 mL at 5 years compared to TURP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a double-blinded, multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial, 181 patients with moderate to severe LUTS secondary to BPH underwent TURP or Aquablation. The primary efficacy endpoint was reduction in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at 6 months. The primary safety endpoint was the occurrence of Clavien-Dindo persistent Grade 1 or Grade 2 or higher operative complications at 3 months. The assessments included IPSS, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and uroflow (Qmax). The patients were followed for 5 years. RESULTS: The primary safety endpoint was successfully achieved at 3 months where the Aquablation group had a lower event rate than TURP (26% vs. 42%, p = .0149 for superiority). Procedure-related ejaculatory dysfunction was lower for Aquablation (7% vs. 25%, p = .0004). The primary efficacy endpoint was successfully achieved at 6 months, where the mean IPSS decreased from baseline by 16.9 points for Aquablation and 15.1 points for TURP; the mean difference in change score at 6 months was 1.8 points larger for Aquablation (p < .0001 for non-inferiority, p = .1346 for superiority). At 5 years, IPSS scores improved by 15.1 points in the Aquablation group and 13.2 points in TURP (p = .2764). However, for men with larger prostates (≥ 50 mL), IPSS reduction was 3.5 points greater across all follow up visits in the Aquablation group compared to the TURP group (p = .0123). Improvement in peak urinary flow rate was 125% and 89% compared to baseline for Aquablation and TURP, respectively. The risk of patients needing a secondary BPH therapy, defined as needing BPH medication or surgical intervention, up to 5 years due to recurrent LUTS was 51% less in the Aquablation arm compared to the TURP arm. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement in net health outcomes from Aquablation therapy outweigh those offered by a TURP when considering the efficacy benefit along with the lower risk of needing a secondary BPH therapy and avoiding retrograde ejaculation. Following Aquablation therapy, symptom reduction and uroflow improvement at 5 years have shown to be durable and consistent across all years of follow up compared to TURP. Larger prostates (≥ 50 mL) demonstrated a larger safety and efficacy benefit for Aquablation over TURP.

The Evolution of Endoscopic Prostate Enucleation: A historical perspective.

Here, we review the evolution of prostate enucleation in chronological order based on energy technology starting first with holmium laser, then bipolar electrocautery, followed by thulium laser and finally greenlight and diode laser enucleation of the prostate.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Aquablation versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: One-year Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To report 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes after either Aquablation or transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) METHODS: This double-blinded, multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial assigned 181 patients with BPH-related moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms to either electrocautery-based prostate resection (TURP) or Aquablation. Efficacy endpoints included reduction in International Prostate Symptom Score and improvement in uroflow parameters. The primary safety endpoint was the occurrence of Clavien-Dindo persistent grade 1 or grade 2 or higher complications. RESULTS: BPH symptom score improvements were similar across groups with 12-month reduction of 15.1 points after TURP or Aquablation. In both groups, mean maximum urinary flow rates increased markedly postoperatively, with mean improvements of 10.3 cc/s for Aquablation versus 10.6 cc/s for TURP (P = .8632). At 1 year, Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was reduced significantly (P < .01) in both groups by 1 point; the reduction was similar across groups (P = .9125). Surgical retreatment for BPH rates for TURP were 1.5% and Aquablation 2.6% within 1 year from the study procedure (P = not significant (NS)). The rate of late complications was low, with no procedure-related adverse events after month 6. CONCLUSION: The 1-year outcomes after TURP and Aquablation were similar and the rate of late procedure-related complications was low. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02505919).

Aquablation of the Prostate for Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Early Results.

Aquablation is a novel technique for the surgical management of bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Following first-in-man studies, a multicenter trial was conducted with results now out to 1 year. Aquablation resulted in a mean International Prostate Symptom Score improvement of 16 points (p < 0.01) and a mean maximum urinary flow rate increase from 8.7 to 18.3 ml/s (p < 0.01) at 12 months. Due to the precise prostate mapping, aquablation has also demonstrated favorable sexual and urinary outcomes with no new erectile dysfunction, retrograde ejaculation, or urinary incontinence as often experienced with other techniques. These improvements in functional outcomes at 12 months confirm that aquablation is a safe and effective alternative for BPH treatment.

Evolving and investigational therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

INTRODUCTION: Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are common and are often caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Traditional surgical methods of open enucleation and transurethral resection of prostrate (TURP) have been efficacious in alleviating these symptoms however, these are operator dependent and often come with significant side effects. In this review, we will discuss upcoming new surgical techniques in management of BPH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of SCOPUS, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were carried out using relevant key words. RESULTS: Intra-prostatic injections with a variety of agents have been explored as these can be readily performed under local anesthesia. Alcohol injections into the prostate have been abandoned due to potential side effects but there has been ongoing development of two alternative agents, NX-1207 and PRX-302. Both have shown good safety profiles and early efficacy in phase II studies. Thermal treatment with the Rezum device performed as an outpatient procedure has shown both safety and efficacy in phase I and II studies. Aquablation shows promise in phase II studies with few side effects and is a relatively an automated procedure, albeit requiring general anesthesia. Prostate artery embolization has been reported in a number of studies, but clinical outcomes have been unpredictable. Histotripsy has had a number of complications in animal models and despite technical improvement has not yet progressed beyond feasibility studies in humans. CONCLUSIONS: Some of the new techniques and technologies available for BPH have been shown to be relatively safe and efficacious and await validation with phase III studies.

A segregation index combining phenotypic (clinical characteristics) and genotypic (gene expression) biomarkers from a urine sample to triage out patients presenting with hematuria who have a low probability of urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Hematuria can be symptomatic of urothelial carcinoma (UC) and ruling out patients with benign causes during primary evaluation is challenging. Patients with hematuria undergoing urological work-ups place significant clinical and financial burdens on healthcare systems. Current clinical evaluation involves processes that individually lack the sensitivity for accurate determination of UC. Algorithms and nomograms combining genotypic and phenotypic variables have largely focused on cancer detection and failed to improve performance. This study aimed to develop and validate a model incorporating both genotypic and phenotypic variables with high sensitivity and a high negative predictive value (NPV) combined to triage out patients with hematuria who have a low probability of having UC and may not require urological work-up. METHODS: Expression of IGFBP5, HOXA13, MDK, CDK1 and CXCR2 genes in a voided urine sample (genotypic) and age, gender, frequency of macrohematuria and smoking history (phenotypic) data were collected from 587 patients with macrohematuria. Logistic regression was used to develop predictive models for UC. A combined genotypic-phenotypic model (G + P INDEX) was compared with genotypic (G INDEX) and phenotypic (P INDEX) models. Area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) defined the performance of each INDEX: high sensitivity, NPV >0.97 and a high test-negative rate was considered optimal for triaging out patients. The robustness of the G + P INDEX was tested in 40 microhematuria patients without UC. RESULTS: The G + P INDEX offered a bias-corrected AUC of 0.86 compared with 0.61 and 0.83, for the P and G INDEXs respectively. When the test-negative rate was 0.4, the G + P INDEX (sensitivity = 0.95; NPV = 0.98) offered improved performance compared with the G INDEX (sensitivity = 0.86; NPV = 0.96). 80% of patients with microhematuria who did not have UC were correctly triaged out using the G + P INDEX, therefore not requiring a full urological work-up. CONCLUSION: The adoption of G + P INDEX enables a significant change in clinical utility. G + P INDEX can be used to segregate hematuria patients with a low probability of UC with a high degree of confidence in the primary evaluation. Triaging out low-probability patients early significantly reduces the need for expensive and invasive work-ups, thereby lowering diagnosis-related adverse events and costs.

HoLEP has come of age.

INTRODUCTION: Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are a common complaint and although can be adequately managed with medication, surgery remains the mainstay of treatment. Transurethral resection has been the reference 'gold standard', but due to its complications and issues with larger volume prostates, many alternatives have been developed and assessed. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) has shown excellent efficacy, durability and safety and has become an important alternative that has gained guideline approval. RESULTS: HoLEP has been shown to have outcomes that are equivalent or better than TURP in both urodynamic measurements and symptom scores. Its outcomes have been proven to be durable and cost-effective. HoLEP has fewer and less serious complications when compared to the current reference standard, its use also allows earlier removal of catheter and hospital discharge. Appropriate mentoring reduces many of the issues associated with the steep learning curve, thus removing the main hurdle to its widespread adoption as the surgical treatment of choice for LUTS due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP fulfils all of the requirements as an alternative/replacement for TURP and open prostatectomy, with equivalent outcomes and reduced complications. With improvements in the learning curve, it could now be considered the true gold standard surgical treatment for BPH. HoLEP has come of age.

Landmarks in BPH--from aetiology to medical and surgical management.

Clinicians treat the symptoms associated with BPH on a daily basis. Although BPH is nearly universal with age, not all men develop lower urinary tract symptoms. Over the past 100 years, several notable advances in the field of urology have not only improved our understanding of the aetiology and natural history of this common disease, but have also facilitated the development of therapeutics to effectively manage BPH-related symptoms. The high quality of modern-day diagnosis, as well as medical and surgical treatment for BPH, is a testimony to centuries of observation and decades of scientific research.

Enucleation techniques for benign prostate obstruction: which one and why?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is the most advanced form of surgical management of benign prostate hyperplasia. The purpose of this review is to update the reader on various modalities currently in use, and in trial, for endoscopic enucleation. RECENT FINDINGS: A recent paradigm shift has occurred for the proponents of electrosurgery technology to utilizes the advantages offered by laser enucleation with interest in bipolar enucleation. Holmium laser enucleation still has the greatest randomized evidence with the longest follow-up among all the various lasers used to perform enucleation. SUMMARY: Randomized trials with longer follow-up are required to demonstrate whether nonholmium types of energy really have advantages in enucleation (speed, ease of use and hemostasis) and durability (decade plus) as compared to the holmium laser.

A randomised single-blind comparison of the effectiveness of Tristel Fuse (chlorine dioxide) as an office-based fluid soak, with Cidex OPA (ortho-phthaldehyde) using an automated endoscopic reprocessor (AER) as high-level disinfection for flexible cystoscopes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness, safety and cost of Tristel Fuse (chlorine dioxide) with Cidex OPA (ortho-phthaldehyde; 1,2-benzenedicarboxaldehyde) in an automated endoscopic reprocessor (AER) for high-level disinfection of flexible cystoscopes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomised single-blind study comparing the high-level disinfectants Tristel Fuse as a simple office-based soak and Cidex OPA using an AER was performed. Participants were 'blinded' to the agent used for disinfection of the flexible cystoscopes. All patients had negative mid-stream urine at baseline, (MSU) no symptoms suggestive of urinary tract infection (UTI) on the day of investigation, no recent antibiotic use or current indwelling urinary catheter. Patients who underwent cystoscopic biopsy during the procedure were excluded. A urine analysis was done before and 3-5 days after cystoscopy and multiple equipment cultures were performed. The Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6 + two questions from the 'long-form'), symptom and quality-of-life scores were assessed before and after cystoscopy as were ease-of-use assessments and a full cost analysis. RESULTS: In all, 180 of 465 screened participants were randomised 1:1 and the mean age was 72.1 years, 17% were females and 57% of procedures were performed for bladder tumour surveillance. The urine analysis was positive in 5.4% of patients in each group and 29% (Tristel) vs 20% (Cidex) of patients had urinary leukocyturia (p = ns) after cystoscopy. The turnover (minutes per cycle) was 7.5 (Tristel) vs 26.7 (Cidex). The per-procedure costs were $11.67 (American dollars) for Tristel Fuse and $21.82 for Cidex OPA with fixed costs of $4788 for Tristel Fuse and $60,514 for Cidex OPA. CONCLUSIONS: Tristel Fuse appears to be as effective and more cost-effective than Cidex OPA for high-level disinfection of flexible cystoscopes. This has significant cost implications for the office urologist.

Which laser works best for benign prostatic hyperplasia?

The advantages offered by lasers compared to older technologies for endoscopic surgery for symptomatic benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) are reviewed. Laser treatments for the endoscopic management of patients with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) resulting from BPH can be divided into three basic techniques. These techniques are vaporisation (removal of tissue), resection of tissue (excision of small chips and subsequent irrigation from bladder) and enucleation (dissection of the adenoma from the surgical capsule and subsequent morcellation). The decision to offer a transurethral laser approach to patients with BPH depends on their comorbidities, the surgeon's expertise with the different procedures, and the availability of the relevant technology.