In vivo Temperature Assessment during Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate.

INTRODUCTION: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) has become popular worldwide for the surgical treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia. Holmium laser is considered an ideal transurethral thermomechanical device for enucleating the prostate. Although there is evidence on Ho:YAG laser-related heat generation, the studies mainly investigated ex vivo temperature generation during holmium laser lithotripsy. In this in vivo study, we aimed to assess for the first time the real-time heat generated during HoLEP. METHODS: Fifteen HoLEP procedures were included. The study was conducted over a time period of 16 months. To investigate the temperature generation, a preoperatively inserted rectal temperature probe and a temperature sensor within a suprapubic bladder catheter were used to record the temperature change during enucleation and coagulation. RESULTS: The mean values of the temperature change during the laser enucleation and coagulation were -0.35 ± 0.203 K (IQR: 0.23) and +0.14 ± 0.259 K (IQR: 0.3), respectively, in rectal measurements. Temperature differences during laser use and coagulation were <+1 K and <+5 K, respectively, in bladder measurements. We measured no temperature >37.1°C during the procedures and no temperature values considered harmful to the human body. CONCLUSION: Sufficient irrigation flow rates and irrigation monitoring during HoLEP are obligatory. To prevent a high and uncontrolled temperature rise, the surgeon or operating room staff should pay attention to the irrigation's continuity.

Temperature assessment study of ex vivo holmium laser enucleation of the prostate model.

PURPOSE: There isscarce evidence to date on how temperature develops during holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). We aimed to determine the potential heat generation during HoLEP under ex vivo conditions. METHODS: We developed two experimental setups. Firstly, we simulated HoLEP ex vivo using narrow-neck laboratory bottles mimicking enucleation cavities and a prostate resection trainer. Seven temperature probes were placed at different locations in the experimental setup, and the heat generation was measured separately during laser application. Secondly, we simulated high-frequency current-based coagulation of the vessels using a roller probe. RESULTS: We observed that the larger the enucleated cavity, the higher the temperature rises, regardless of the irrigation flow rate. The highest temperature difference with an irrigation flow was approximately + 4.5 K for a cavity measuring 100ccm and a 300 ml/min irrigation flow rate. The higher flow rate generates faster removal of the generated heat, thus cooling down the artificial cavity. Furthermore, the temperature differences at different irrigation flow rates (except at 0 ml/min) were consistently below 5 K. Within the resection trainer, the temperature increase with and without irrigation flow was approximately 0.5 K and 3.0 K, respectively. The mean depth of necrosis (1084 ± 176 µm) achieved by the roller probe was significantly greater when using 144 W energy. CONCLUSION: Carefully adjusted irrigation and monitoring during HoLEP are crucial when evacuating the thermal energy generated during the procedure. We believe this study of ours provides evidence with the potential to facilitate clinical studies on patient safety.

Combined prostatic urethral lift and remodeling of the prostate and bladder neck: a modified transurethral approach in the treatment of symptomatic lower urinary tract obstruction.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of combining prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and a limited resection of the prostatic middle lobe or bladder neck incision in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients were treated at two tertiary centers and followed prospectively. Patient evaluations included patient characteristics, relief of LUTS symptoms, erectile and ejaculatory function, continence, operative time and adverse events. Patients were followed for a mean of 10.9 months. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were as follows: age 66 years (46-85), prostate volume 39.6 cc (22-66), preoperative IPSS/AUASI 20 (6-35)/QoL 3.9 (1-6)/peak flow 10.5 mL/s (4.0-19)/post-void residual volume (PVR) 123 mL (0-500). Mean operating time was 31 min (9-55). Postoperative complications were minor except for the surgical retreatment of one patient for blood clot retention (Clavien 3b). One patient required catheterization due to urinary retention. Reduction of symptoms (IPSS - 59.6%), increase in QoL (+ 49.0%), increase in flow (+ 111.5%), and reduction of PVR (- 66.8%) were significant. Antegrade ejaculation was always maintained. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a combination of PUL and transurethral surgical techniques is feasible, safe, and effective. This approach may be offered to patients with moderate size prostates including those with unfavorable anatomic conditions for PUL. This procedure is still 'minimally invasive' and preserves sexual function. In addition, it may add to a higher functional efficacy compared to PUL alone. STUDY REGISTER NUMBER: DRKS00008970.