RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transient urinary incontinence (UI) is distressing event following holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). Novel technique namely, veil sparing HoLEP (VS-HoLEP), was proposed to improve early continence outcome. In this trial (NCT03494049), VS-HoLEP was compared to standard HoLEP (St-HoLEP). METHODS: VS-HoLEP entails early apical separation with sparing of ventral apical mucosal veil proximal to the verumontanum. Eligible symptomatic BPH patients were randomly allocated to St-HoLEP (91) and VS-HoLEP (89). The primary outcome was UI as depicted by one-hour pad test at one month postoperatively. Other outcome measures include all perioperative parameters, complications, and urinary outcome measures at different follow-up points. RESULTS: Median preoperative prostate size was 138 (50:282) and 128 (50:228) mL in St-HoLEP and VS-HoLEP groups respectively. At one month the number of patients with positive one-hour pad test was 21 (23.1%) and 10 (11.4%) in St-HoLEP and VS-HoLEP groups respectively (P 0.047). The difference was significantly in favor of VS-HoLEP considering the number of patients reporting UI, the number of patients with positive one-hour pad test as well as the grade of UI reported at one and 4 months. The difference was not statistically significant at 12 months. The median time to patients' reported continence was 8 (1-52) and 1.5 (1-52) weeks in St-HoLEP and VS-HoLEP groups respectively (P≤0.005). The technique independently predicted positive one-hour pad test at one and four months respectively. At twelve months presence of DM (diabetes mellitus) and more percent PSA reduction independently predicted positive one-hour pad test. CONCLUSIONS: Veil sparing HoLEP enhances significantly early postoperative urine continence both subjectively and objectively. Optimization of the surgical technique could cut short the number of leaking patients and reduce the degree as well as the duration of transient postoperative urine leak.
Assuntos
Lasers de Estado Sólido , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Hiperplasia Prostática , Incontinência Urinária , Humanos , Masculino , Lasers de Estado Sólido/uso terapêutico , Lasers de Estado Sólido/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Hiperplasia Prostática/cirurgia , Incontinência Urinária/etiologia , Incontinência Urinária/prevenção & controle , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Prostatectomia/efeitos adversos , Prostatectomia/métodos , Terapia a Laser/métodos , Terapia a Laser/efeitos adversos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the non-inferiority of Low-power Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (LP-HoLEP) to high-power (HP-HoLEP) for enucleation efficiency pertaining to the advantages of lower cost and minimal postoperative dysuria, storage symptoms, and negative sexual impact. PATIENTS AND METHODS: HoLEP was performed using 100W Versapulse, Luminis Inc., with 2J/25Hz for LP-HoLEP (61 patients) and 2J/50Hz for HP-HoLEP (60 patients). Two surgeons with different experience performed equal number of both procedures. Non-inferiority of enucleation efficiency (enucleated weight/min) was evaluated. All perioperative parameters were recorded and compared. Dysuria was assessed at 2 weeks by dysuria visual analog scale, urinary (Q.max and IPSS) and sexual (sexual health inventory for men score) outcome measures were evaluated at 1, 4, and 12 months. RESULTS: Baseline and perioperative parameters were comparable between the two groups. Mean enucleation efficiency was 1.42±0.6 vs 1.47±0.6 gm/min, Pâ¯=â¯.6 following LP-HoLEP and HP-HoLEP, respectively. Patients reported postoperative dysuria similarly in both groups as per dysuria visual analog scale. There was significant comparable improvement in IPSS (international prostate symptom score) and Q.max in both groups at different follow-up points. At one year, median IPSS and Q.max were comparable in both groups (Pâ¯=â¯.4 and .7 following LP-HoLEP and HP-HoLEP, respectively). Median postoperative reduction in prostate specific antigen was 89% (42:99) following LP-HoLEP vs 81% (62:94) after HP-HoLEP, Pâ¯=â¯.92. Both groups showed comparable perioperative and late postoperative complications. There were no statistically significant changes in the last follow-up sexual health inventory for men score in comparison to baseline score. CONCLUSION: LP-HoLEP is non-inferior to HP-HoLEP in terms of all efficiency parameters regardless level of surgeon experience.