Aquablation versus TURP: 5-year outcomes of the WATER randomized clinical trial for prostate volumes 50-80 mL.

INTRODUCTION: To report the 5-year efficacy and safety of Aquablation compared with transurethral resection of the prostate for the management of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in men with prostate volumes 50-80 mL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a large double-blinded, multicenter, and prospective randomized controlled trial, 96 randomized men with 50-80 mL prostates who underwent Aquablation or transurethral prostate resection were prospectively identified for subgroup analysis. Follow up was performed for up to 5 years. The primary efficacy endpoint was the reduction in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at 6 months. The primary safety endpoint was the occurrence of Clavien-Dindo (CD) postoperative complications grade 1 persistent and grade 2 or higher at 3 months. RESULTS: Both groups had comparable baseline characteristics. Reduction in IPSS score was significantly higher in the Aquablation group across 5 years of follow up (-14.1 vs. -10.8, p = 0.02). The Aquablation group achieved a significantly lower rate of CD1P and CD2 or higher events at 3 months follow up (risk difference of -23.1%). Among recorded adverse events, de novo postoperative ejaculatory dysfunction was notably lower in Aquablation (risk difference of -21.9%), while the risk of bleeding remained similar after 6 months. The surgical and medical retreatment rate at 6 months was also lower in Aquablation (risk difference of -14.4%). CONCLUSIONS: In the 50-80 mL prostate volume subgroup, Aquablation yields superior long-term symptom relief and lower complication rates than standard transurethral resection, with notably lower rates of ejaculatory dysfunction. This further supports the adoption of Aquablation for men with medium-sized prostates.

Same-day discharge for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To systematically review studies focused on the feasibility and outcomes of outpatient endoscopic enucleation of the prostate for benign prostatic obstruction. METHODS: A literature search was conducted through December 2022 using PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Embase databases. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. Risk of bias assessment was performed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for case control studies. RESULTS: Of 773 studies, ten were included in the systematic review (n = 1942 patients) and four in the meta-analysis (n = 1228 patients). The pooled incidence of successful same-day discharge was 84% (95% CI 0.72-0.91). Unplanned readmission was recorded in 3% (95% CI 0.02-0.06) of ambulatory cases. In the reported criteria-selected patients submitted to SDD surgery, the forest plot suggested a lower rate of postoperative readmission (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.91, p = 0.02) and complications (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.48-1, p < 0.05) rates compared to standard protocols. CONCLUSION: We provide the first systematic review and meta-analysis on SDD for endoscopic prostate enucleation. Despite the lack of randomized controlled trials, we confirm the feasibility and safety of the protocol with no increase in complications or readmission rate in well-selected patients.

The impact of 5-ARI on perioperative and functional outcomes of GreenLight PVP: an analysis of the Global GreenLight Group database.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we sought to investigate the impact of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARI) on the perioperative and functional outcomes of 180-Watt XPS GreenLight photovaporization of the prostate (PVP) using a large international database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from the Global GreenLight Group (GGG) database, which includes eight high-volume, experienced surgeons from seven international centers.  All men with established benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with known 5-ARI status who underwent GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180W system between 2011 and 2019 were eligible for the study.  Patients were assigned to two groups based on the preoperative use of 5-ARI.  Analyses were adjusted for patient age, prostate volume, and American Society of Anesthesia (ASA) score. RESULTS: We included 3,500 men, of which 1,246 (36%) had preoperative 5-ARI use.  Patients in both groups were similar with regards to age and prostate size.  On multivariable analysis, total operative time was slightly shorter (-3.26 min 95% CI: 1.20 - 5.32, p < 0.01) and required 35.6kJ less laser energy (95% CI: -48.0kJ - -23.3kJ, p < 0.01) for patients on 5ARI compared to those without 5-ARI.  However, no clinically significant difference was appreciated regarding postoperative transfusion rates [OR 0.048 (95% CI -0.82-0.91; p = 0.91)], hematuria rates [OR 0.96 (95% CI 0.72-1.3; p = 0.81)], 30-day readmission rates [OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.71-1.4; p = 0.90)], or overall functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that preoperative 5-ARI is not associated with any clinically significant different perioperative or functional outcomes for GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180W system.  There is no role for the initiation or discontinuation of 5-ARI prior to GreenLight PVP.

Safety and efficacy of GreenLight PVP in octogenarians: evaluation of the Global GreenLight Group database.

INTRODUCTION: The present study analyzes the largest international GreenLight database, the Global GreenLight Group (GGG), to evaluate the functional and safety profile of GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in octogenarians. METHODS: The GGG is a database comprised of patients that underwent GreenLight PVP from 2011 to 2019 performed by 8 experienced urologists at 7 international hospitals. Patients 80 years or older at the time of surgery were categorized as octogenarians. They were compared to a similar group of PVP patients below the age of 80. RESULTS: Among 3,648 patients, 586 men were above the age of 80. Compared to patients under the age of 80, octogenarians had larger prostates (76.0 vs 71.9 ml, p = 0.02) and a lower BMI (25.6 vs 26.7, p = 0.045). Operative time was not significantly longer in octogenarians. The improvement in functional outcomes between 80-year-old patients and control patients was not significantly different at one-year follow-up, with the exception of maximum urinary flow (Qmax) that favoured younger patients (10.3 vs 12.6 ml/s, p = 0.02). The odds of transfusion were greater for older patients [OR 8.2 (95% CI 3.6-18.9, p < 0.01)], but they were not at increased risk of hematuria. Octogenarians had higher readmission rates (23.0 vs 11.9%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: GreenLight PVP is a safe option in well-selected octogenarians in a cohort of patients treated by surgeons experienced with the technology. The odds of transfusion were higher in patients over 80, but the absolute risk remains low. The 30-day hospital readmission rate was higher in octogenarians.

Functional outcomes of GreenLight 180-W photoselective vaporization in patients with large (≥ 80 cc) prostates: an analysis of over 3000 men in the Global Greenlight Group (GGG) database.

INTRODUCTION: GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) has gained widespread adoption as an option to traditional transurethral resection of the prostate. Prior reports expressed concern with the use of PVP in large prostates. The aim of this study was to investigate the adjusted outcomes of GreenLight PVP in men with large (≥ 80 cc) vs. small prostates (< 80 cc). METHODS: Data were obtained from the Global Greenlight Group which pools data from 7 high volume centers. Men with established benign prostatic hyperplasia who underwent GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180 W system between 2011 and 2019 were eligible and assigned into two groups based on their prostate size (≥ 80 and < 80 cc). 11 functional and perioperative covariates were collected. Analyses were adjusted for patient age and presence of median lobe. RESULTS: 3426 men met the inclusion criteria. 34.6% (n = 1187) of patients had a large prostate size. Baseline age and prostate volume were significantly different between the groups. The magnitude of absolute improvement in unadjusted international prostate symptom score was significantly greater in the large (≥ 80 cc) prostate group at 12 months, with an absolute change of 19.17 points (95% CI 18.46-19.88; p < 0.01). There was also a significant drop in PVR at both 6- (p = 0.007) and 12 months (p = 0.005). There were no significant differences in transfusion (p = 0.42), hematuria (p = 0.80), or 30-day readmission rates (p = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Greenlight PVP is a safe and effective alternative for patients with prostate sizes ≥ 80 cc, with durable outcomes relatively independent from prostate size.

Oncological and safety profiles in patients undergoing simultaneous transurethral resection (TUR) of bladder tumour and TUR of the prostate.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the oncological impact and adverse events of performing simultaneous transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURB) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), as evidence on the outcomes of simultaneous TURB for bladder cancer and TURP for obstructive benign prostatic hyperplasia is limited and contradictory. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients from 12 European hospitals treated with either TURB alone or simultaneous TURB and TURP (TURB+TURP) were retrospectively analysed. A propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 was performed with patients from the TURB+TURP group matched to TURB-alone patients. Associations between surgery approach with recurrence-free (RFS) and progression-free (PFS) survivals were assessed in Cox regression models before and after PSM. We performed a subgroup analysis in patients with risk factors for recurrence (multifocality and/or tumour size >3 cm). RESULTS: A total of 762 men were included, among whom, 76% (581) underwent a TURB alone and 24% (181) a TURB+TURP. There was no difference in terms of tumour characteristics between the groups. We observed comparable length of stay as well as complication rates including major complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥III) for the TURB-alone vs TURB+TURP groups, while the latest led to longer operative time (P < 0.001). During a median follow-up of 44 months, there were more recurrences in the TURB-alone (47%) compared to the TURB+TURP group (28%; P < 0.001). Interestingly, there were more recurrences at the bladder neck/prostatic fossa in the TURB-alone group (55% vs 3%, P < 0.001). TURB+TURP procedures were associated with improved RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.53; P < 0.001), but not PFS (HR 1.63, 95% CI 0.90-2.98; P = 0.11). Within the PSM cohort of 254 patients, the simultaneous TURB+TURP was still associated with improved RFS (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.22-0.49; P < 0.001). This was also true in the subgroup of 380 patients with recurrence risk factors (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.28-0.62; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In our contemporary cohort, simultaneous TURB and TURP seems to be an oncologically safe option that may, even, improve RFS by potentially preventing disease recurrence at the bladder neck and in the prostatic fossa.

Aquablation Treatment for Benign Prostate Hyperplasia: Current Standardized Procedure.

The following video Atlas summary reviews all technical elements of the standardized setup, robotic execution, aquablation procedure, and hemostasis for efficient rapid benign prostate hyperplasia treatment.

Randomized prospective trial of the severity of irritative symptoms after HoLEP vs ThuFLEP.

PURPOSE: To compare the short-term postoperative functional outcomes and severity of irritative symptoms following holmium and thulium fiber laser enucleation (HoLEP and ThuFLEP). METHODS: This prospective randomized single-blinded study was performed in accordance with CONSORT. The inclusion criteria were IPSS > 20 or Qmax < 10 ml/s. Patients were randomized between HoLEP and ThuFLEP. Demographics, objective data (PSA, prostate volume, etc.), data on urinary and sexual function (IPSS, IIEF, QoL, QUID, Qmax, ICIQ-MLUTS) were collected. Detailed perioperative information and postoperative data on functional outcomes at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 weeks and 6 months were collected. RESULTS: Data on 163 participants were included (77-HoLEP, 86-ThuFLEP). No differences were found in surgery duration; number of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo I-III), catheterization time and hospital stay. Functional outcomes up to 6 months didn't differ between the groups (IPPS, IIEF, QoL, QUID, ICIQ-MLUTS, Qmax, p > 0.05). Total ICIQ-MLUTS, bother and voiding scores at 1 and 3 months significantly increased compared with the baseline in both groups (p < 0.05). No difference between the groups were observed. In HoLEP the SUI series rate was 1.3% and 1.3% after 3 and 6 months following the procedure; in ThuFLEP: it was 3.5% and 2.3% respectively (p = 0.35 and p = 0.54). CONCLUSION: The preliminary results of the study showed no apparent differences in functional outcomes (IPSS, Qmax), rate of SUI or irritative symptoms. Both ThuFLEP and HoLEP are efficient ways of treating benign prostatic obstruction. Both surgeries are comparable in terms of duration and postoperative complication rates.

Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: Prospective Study of Mid- and Long-Term Outcomes in 1328 Patients.

Objective: The objective of our study was to estimate the long-term efficacy and safety of thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP). Materials and Methods: We analyzed patients who underwent ThuFLEP due to lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) related to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Both the pre- and perioperative data as well as the follow-up data for 3 years were evaluated: prostate volume, postvoid residual (PVR), maximum flow rate (Qmax), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), prostate-specific antigen level, and the complication rate. Intraoperative data relating to the weight of resected tissue, the duration of surgery, catheterization, and data on hospital stays were also collected. A subgroup analysis was performed to assess whether older patients (>65 years) or those with larger glands (>80 cc) are prone to increased complication risks. Results: A total of 1328 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 66.9 ± 7.5 years. Mean prostate volume was 86.9 ± 41.9 (20-330) cc. All the functional parameters (IPSS, QoL, PVR, Qmax) significantly improved after surgery (p < 0.05) and showed durable improvement up to 3 years of follow-up. The frequency of late complications was as follows: stress urinary incontinence-1.2%; urethral stricture-1.1%; and bladder neck contracture-0.9%. Subgroup analyses revealed increased urinary tract infection frequency in older patients (3.5% vs 0.8%, p = 0.003) as well as higher rate of stress urinary incontinence (0.4% vs 1.8%, p = 0.002) and higher rate of clot retention (11.3% vs 4.4%, p < 0.001) in those with larger glands. Conclusions: Irrespective of the patient's age and prostate volume, ThuFLEP represents an effective and durable technique of endoscopic enucleation characterized by a low incidence of complications after 3 years of follow-up. In the hands of an experienced surgeon, ThuFLEP can rightly be a promising alternative to holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for treatment of LUTS associated with BPO.

GreenLight photovaporization of the prostate in high-medical-risk patients: an analysis of the Global GreenLight Group (GGG) database.

PURPOSE: We sought to characterize the adjusted outcomes of GreenLight photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in high-medical-risk (HMR) patients using data from the largest international database. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Global GreenLight Group (GGG) database which pools data of eight high-volume, experienced surgeons, from a total of seven international centers. Eligible study participants underwent GreenLight PVP using the XPS-180 W system between 2011 and 2019. HMR patients were defined as patients with ASA III or greater and were compared to non-HMR patients. Analyses were adjusted for patient age and prostate volume. RESULTS: In the HMR group, patients on average were older and had smaller prostates than the non-HMR control group. Compared to non-HMR patients, transfusions occurred more frequently (2.6% vs. 0.14%, p < 0.01) and the odds of readmission were elevated [OR 2.0, (95% CI 1.4-2.8, p < 0.01)] among HMR patients. Twelve months postoperatively, HMR patients experience greater improvement in QoL than the control group [+ 0.54 (95% CI 0.07-1.0, p = 0.02)]. PVR also decreased 93.1 ml more in HMR than in non-HMR patients after 12 months (95% CI 33.6-152.6, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: We found that GreenLight PVP is safe and effective in improving functional outcomes in higher-risk patients with severe systemic disease compared to their lower-risk counterparts. Though absolute risks remain low, GreenLight PVP is associated with higher odds of transfusion and readmission in the high-risk cohort. The findings of our study reaffirm current guidelines that propose PVP as a viable treatment option for HMR patients.

Enucleation vs. vaporization of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a head-to-head comparison of the various outcomes and complications. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Vaporization of the prostate (VP) and endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) are reliable and frequently used methods for BPO relief. Both surgeries utilize lasers and EAU recommends them in similar patient cohorts. Our objective was to compare intra- and perioperative results of patients who had undergone VP and EEP. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature search was performed in three databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science and Scopus). The detailed search strategy is available at Prospero, CRD42020204739. Primary outcomes were functional results (IPSS, QoL, PVR, Qmax), and secondary outcomes were intraoperative results, postoperative PSA and prostate volume, complications, and recurrence rate. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: VP required less operative time compared to EEP, mean difference -5.51 (95% CI -7.52; -3.50). IPSS and Qmax for VP were worse after 12-month follow-up, mean difference 0.89 (95% CI 0.52; 1.27) and -3.7 (95% CI -4.56; -2.85), respectively, while QoL did not differ significantly. Postoperative PSA level was higher in the VP group, mean difference 2.28 (95% CI 2.00; 2.55). VP was associated with reduced Clavien-Dindo grade I (OR=4.16; 95% CI 2.96; 5.84) and grade II (OR=3.79; 95% CI 2.25; 6.39) complication rate, especially in terms of the percentage of blood transfusion and transient urinary incontinence. The rate of complications grade IIIa and higher was similar (3-6%). Reoperation rate was only estimated in one study and was significantly higher in the PVP group at 60 months of follow-up, 2.7% vs. 0%, P<0.05. CONCLUSIONS: EEP and VP share the efficacy and safety in BPH management. Our meta-analysis shows comparable complication rate in Clavien-Dindo III, VP superiority in operation time, and EEP superiority in long-term functional outcomes and PSA reduction.

Propensity-score analysis comparing perioperative and functional outcomes between XPS 180 W-photovaporization and GreenLight laser enucleation of the prostate: reasons to discard vaporization and move to enucleation.

PURPOSE: To compare the perioperative and functional outcomes between 180_W XPS GreenLight photoselective vaporization (PVP) and 532-nm GreenLight laser enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP) in the surgical management of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained international database of patients managed with GreenLight laser surgery (PVP or GreenLEP) was performed. To adjust for potential baseline confounders, propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied at a ratio of 1:1 to compare the perioperative and functional outcomes between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 2,420 patients were included. 1,491 (61.6%) underwent PVP and 929 (38.4%) underwent GreenLEP. Before PSM analysis, patients in the vaporization group were older (p < 0.001), had a lower PSA and prostate volume at baseline (p < 0.001). Using estimated propensity scores, 78 patients in the PVP group were matched 1:1 to the patients in the GreenLEP group. The incidence of overall postoperative complications was comparable between the two groups (19 vs. 16%, p = 0.06). However, after PSM, PVP was found to be associated with a higher rate of overall complications (33 vs. 11%, p = 0.001). At 3 months and at last follow-up the I-PSS, Qmax and PSA had similarly decreased in the two groups with a greater improvement in the GreenLEP group (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PVP and GreenLEP are two efficient and safe techniques for treating BPO. However, PVP was associated with longer operative time and higher risk of reoperation on a midterm follow-up compared to GreenLEP.

Review of Sexual Preservation After Novel Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Surgical Treatment Modalities From Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Traditional benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment options, such as transurethral resection of the prostate and laser, have focused on addressing urinary symptoms for men; however, these options are associated with a high risk of sexual dysfunction. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess newer technologies (Aquablation therapy, UroLift, and Rezum) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia and the impact of preserving sexual function compared with transurethral resection of the prostate. METHODS: A comprehensive review of Food and Drug Administration randomized studies from each of the technologies was carried out. A comparison of 3-year outcomes for International Index of Erectile Function-5 and Male Sexual Health Questionnaire Ejaculatory Function domain short form was analyzed. RESULTS: Aquablation and prostatic urethral lift were the only therapies to show permanent sexual function preservation in both Male Sexual Health Questionnaire Ejaculatory Function domain short form (ejaculatory function) and International Index of Erectile Function-5 (erectile function) at 3 years after treatment. CONCLUSION: For prostates less than 80 cc, Aquablation and prostatic urethral lift were able to demonstrate permanent sexual function preservation in both Male Sexual Health Questionnaire Ejaculatory Function domain short form (ejaculatory function) and International Index of Erectile Function-5 (erectile function) at 3 years after treatment. Bhojani N, Yafi FA, Misrai V, et al. Review of Sexual Preservation After Novel Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Surgical Treatment Modalities From Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trials. Sex Med Rev 2021;9:169-173.

Reasons to overthrow TURP: bring on Aquablation.

PURPOSE: In this review, we will discuss the state of the literature regarding Aquablation, its limitations, and opportunities for its application in the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement (BPE). METHODS: A comprehensive review of original research on Aquablation was conducted. Articles related to transurethral resection of the prostate, holmium laser enucleation of the prostate, greenlight photoselective vaporization of the prostate, and simple prostatectomy were reviewed for discussion. RESULTS: For small-medium prostates (30-80 mL), Aquablation's main advantages include better ejaculatory function and similar functional outcomes compared to TURP. For large prostates (80-150 mL), Aquablation demonstrates shorter operative time and superior ejaculatory function when compared to simple prostatectomy, HoLEP, and Greenlight PVP. In addition, Aquablation displays shorter hospital stays than simple prostatectomy. The integration of software programming and semi-automatic technology increases the reproducibility of the procedure and helps standardize overall outcomes, while also accelerating the learning curve. Its ability to preserve antegrade ejaculation makes Aquablation a very compelling option for sexually active patients. However cost and postoperative bleeding risks remain a concern. CONCLUSION: The current evidence suggests that Aquablation is a safe and effective alternative for BPE for small to large prostates. Further prospective clinical trials, with comparisons to other BPE modalities, and data from longer follow-up periods are still required.

Operative time comparison of aquablation, greenlight PVP, ThuLEP, GreenLEP, and HoLEP.

INTRODUCTION: The BPH surgical armamentarium is composed of a rapidly expanding number of technologies and techniques. These include greenlight photovaporization of the prostate (PVP), greenlight enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP), holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) and, more recently, the aquablation procedure. To the best of our knowledge, no direct comparison in operative time has been performed. METHODS: Data for this study were pooled from five sources. For aquablation, patient-level data from four studies of the aquablation procedure were provided by the device manufacturer as well as from a high-volume commercial user. PVP, GreenLEP, HoLEP, and ThuLEP were performed by high-volume, experienced experts. Endpoints included total operative time, resection time, and proportion of total operative time for resection. General linear models were used to evaluate the relationship between prostate volume (or other continuous predictors) and procedure time. RESULTS: Total procedure time was related to prostate size. Except for the small prostate size range (size < 40 cc), at any given prostate volume, procedure time was highest for PVP, intermediate for LEPs, and lowest for Aquablation. The relationship between procedure time and prostate size (i.e., slope of the fitted lines) was 0.16 min/g for aquablation, 0.32 min/g, 0.28 min/g and 0.32 min/g for GreenLEP, HoLEP and ThuLEP, respectively, and 0.63 min/g for PVP. CONCLUSION: In our analysis of pooled data of multi-surgical techniques and technologies, aquablation provided the lowest operative time across all prostate volumes. PVP had the longest procedure time for prostates > 40 cc.

Laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate: perioperative outcomes from the ACS NSQIP database.

PURPOSE: To compare the perioperative outcomes associated with laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) using a national database. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was reviewed for patients who underwent TURP or LEP from 2008 to 2016. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and predisposition to bleeding were compared between TURP and LEP. The 30-day perioperative outcomes including operative time, length of hospital stay (LOS), return to the operating room (OR), bleeding requiring transfusion, and organ system-specific complications were compared between the procedures. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed, adjusting for the type of surgery and other covariates. RESULTS: The series included 37,577 TURP and 2869 LEP procedures. While TURP was associated with a shorter operative time (55.20 ± 37.80 min) than LEP (102.80 ± 62.30 min), the latter was associated with a shorter hospital stay (1.29 ± 2.73 days) than TURP (2.05 ± 5.20 days). Compared to TURP, LEP had 0.52 (0.47-0.58) times the odds of a LOS > 1 day and 0.67 (0.54-0.83) times the odds of developing urinary tract infections. Nevertheless, no difference was found for other postoperative complications, need for transfusion, and return to OR. CONCLUSION: Real-life data from a large national database confirmed that LEP is a safe and reproducible procedure to treat benign prostatic obstruction. Compared to TURP, LEP was associated with a lower rate of infectious complications and a shorter LOS at the expense of an increased operative time.

En-bloc endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the gold standard for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Yet, the introduction of lasers for the treatment of LUTS due to BPO has dramatically changed the surgical landscape of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) treatment. Recently, "en-bloc" techniques have shown to prove advantageous in terms of better visualization, more prompt identification of the surgical capsule and the correct plane to dissect. Herein we provide a comprehensive overview of available series of en-bloc enucleation of the prostate, focusing on surgical techniques, perioperative and functional outcomes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of the literature was performed according to PRISMA recommendations and was conducted on surgical techniques and perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive en-bloc surgery for prostate adenoma detachment. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, 16 studies with 2750 patients between 2003 and 2019 were included. Specific technical nuances have been described to maximize perioperative outcomes of en-bloc prostatic enucleation, including early apical release, horse-shape incisions, inverted U-shape tractions and low power. Overall, regardless of the energy employed, en-bloc prostatic enucleation achieved favorable outcomes including low risk of major complications and quality of life improvement. However, a great heterogeneity of study design, patients' inclusion criteria, prostate volume and en-bloc surgical strategy was found. CONCLUSIONS: En-bloc endoscopic enucleation of the prostate has been shown to be technically feasible and safe, with potential technical advantages over the classic three-lobe technique. Larger comparative studies are needed to evaluate the ultimate impact of the en-bloc approach on postoperative outcomes, in light of the surgeon's learning curve.