COmparing Urolift and Standard Transurethral resection of prostate Ahead of Radiotherapy in men with urinary symptoms secondary to prostate enlargement in Southwest London and North Cumbria (CO-STAR): a study protocol for a randomised feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing prostate radiotherapy with an enlarged prostate can have short-term and long-term urinary complications. Currently, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the mainstay surgical intervention for men with urinary symptoms due to an enlarged prostate prior to radiotherapy. UroLift (NeoTract, Pleasanton, CA, USA) is a recent minimally invasive alternative, widely used in benign disease but is untested in men with prostate cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, two-arm study designed in collaboration with a Patient Reference Group to assess the feasibility of randomising men with prostate cancer and coexisting urinary symptoms due to prostate enlargement to TURP or UroLift ahead of radiotherapy. 45 patients will be enrolled and randomised (1:1) using a computer-generated programme to TURP or UroLift. Recruitment and retention will be assessed over a 12 month period. Information on clinical outcomes, adverse events and costs will be collected. Clinical outcomes and patient reported outcome measures will be measured at baseline, 6 weeks postintervention and 3 months following radiotherapy. A further 12 in-depth interviews will be conducted with a subset of patients to assess acceptability using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Descriptive analysis on all outcomes will be performed using Stata (StataCorp V.2021). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee (REC) NHS Health Research Authority (HRA) and Health and Care Research Wales (HCRW). The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at national meetings and disseminated to patients via social media, charity and hospital websites. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05840549.

Permanent interstitial brachytherapy for prostate cancer implementing neoadjuvant prostatic artery embolization.

PURPOSE: Indication for permanent interstitial brachytherapy (PIB) can be limited by prostate volume, commonly decreased using neoadjuvant hormonal therapy. Volume changes and initial clinical results focusing on patients treated with prostatic artery embolization (PAE) were evaluated in this study. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A group of 102 consecutive patients were treated with permanent interstitial brachytherapy (PIB), 13 patients received a neoadjuvant PAE (median 12 weeks before PIB) in case of large prostate volume >60 cm³, and moderate to severe urinary problems. RESULTS: Patients after PAE were treated with significantly larger prostate volumes (52 ± 11 cm³ vs. 39 ± 11 cm³; p < 0.01; 66 ± 17 cm³ before PAE), but larger volume reductions to 44 ± 10 cm³ versus 35 ± 10 cm³ was found at day 30 (p < 0.05). International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) decreased significantly from 13 ± 5 before PAE to 7 ± 4 after PAE; p < 0.01. Initial PSA and first PSA after PIB were similar for patients with versus without PAE (5.9 ± 2.9 ng/mL vs. 6.2 ± 2.8 ng/mL and 1.5 ± 0.8 ng/mL vs. 1.9 ± 1.5 ng/mL). However, PSA 12 months after PIB was significantly lower after PAE (0.4 ± 0.3 ng/mL vs. 0.8 ± 0.6 ng/mL; p = 0.03). Four patients without prior PAE needed an intervention after urinary retention - transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in three cases and PAE in a single case. Urinary incontinence resulted in two cases after TURP. CONCLUSIONS: PAE could be successfully applied to decrease prostate volume and reduce urinary symptoms before PIB or as a treatment for urinary retention after PIB. A significantly lower PSA is promising for improved long-term cancer control.

Safety and Effectiveness of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate Using a Low-power Laser.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) using a low-power 30-W holmium laser with an en bloc enucleation technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 74 patients with a diagnosis of benign prostatic hyperplasia treated with HoLEP using a 30-W laser set at 1.5 J with a frequency of 20 Hz, as a low-power setting. The enucleation process was performed using the en bloc technique. Forty-four patients were operated on by an experienced surgeon, whereas 30 patients were operated on by 2 less experienced surgeons. We evaluated the surgical parameters and practicality of the low-power laser. RESULTS: All patients underwent successful HoLEP with the low-power setting; it was not necessary to increase the output of the laser in any case. Mean preoperative estimated prostate volume was 94.5 mL (range 22-489 mL). Mean total operating time and enucleation time were 91.9 minutes (range 30-232 minutes) and 45.4 minutes (range 13-101 minutes), respectively. No patient required blood transfusion postoperatively. Other intraoperative complications, including capsular perforation and ureteral orifice injury, did not occur. In 55 patients without preoperative stress urinary incontinence (SUI), postoperative SUI was observed in 7 patients (12.7%) at 1 month postoperatively, and in 3 patients (5.5%) at 3 months postoperatively. CONCLUSION: HoLEP using a low-power 30-W holmium laser can be performed safely and without any technical problems; this low-power setting is thought to be sufficient for performing HoLEP. As the introduction costs can be reduced by using a low-power laser, HoLEP could become widespread.

[Pilot results of prostatic adenoma treatment with diode laser Medilas D UroBeam in the Ukraine].

Pilot results of prostatic adenoma treatment with diode laser (940 nm) in 94 patients showed high efficacy of laser vaporization of the prostate. The effect was achieved in all the patients in minimal number of complications and in satisfactory tolerance of the surgery. Laser vaporization has some advantages over standard treatment (TUR) and is a method of choice in small and middle-size adenomas. In large adenoma good results were obtained in combination of laser vaporization with bipolar TUR.

[Changes in prostatic circulation in response to laser therapy and magnetic therapy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia].

The results of preoperative preparation were analysed in 59 patients with prostatic benign hyperplasia (PBH) subjected to TUR. Treatment outcomes were assessed by transrectal ultrasound (color Doppler mapping) in two groups of patients. Group 1 received combined therapy including transrectal laser radiation of the prostate, group 2--transrectal magnetotherapy. The analysis showed that laser radiation reduced insignificantly the size of the prostate and adenomatous node, improved microcirculation and circulation in the prostate. This resulted in relief of inflammation and reduction of the number of postoperative inflammatory complications. Transrectal magnetotherapy has a positive effect on vascularization and hemodynamics of the prostate, local immunity, contamination of the tissues with pathogenic flora.

Targeted transurethral microwave thermotherapy versus alpha-blockade in benign prostatic hyperplasia: outcomes at 18 months.

OBJECTIVES: To compare directly the efficacy, safety, and durability of targeted transurethral microwave thermotherapy with that of alpha-blocker treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia. METHODS: In a randomized, controlled clinical trial, 52 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia received terazosin treatment and 51 underwent microwave treatment under topical anesthesia. The patient evaluation included the International Prostate Symptom Score, peak flow rate, and quality-of-life score before microwave treatment or initiation of terazosin treatment and at periodic intervals thereafter up to 18 months. RESULTS: The mean International Prostate Symptom Score, peak flow rate, and quality-of-life score all improved significantly in both groups by 6 months. However, the magnitude of improvement was significantly greater in the microwave group than in the terazosin group. The significant between-group differences observed at 6 months in the mean International Prostate Symptom Score, peak flow rate, and quality-of-life score were fully maintained at 18 months, at which time the improvements in these three outcome measures were significantly greater (P <0.0005), by 35%, 22%, and 43%, respectively, in the microwave group than in the terazosin group. The actuarial rate of treatment failure at 18 months was significantly greater by sevenfold in the terazosin group. Adverse events were generally infrequent and readily manageable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although the initial onset of terazosin action was more rapid, the longer term clinical outcomes of targeted microwave treatment were markedly superior. The more favorable results in patients who underwent microwave treatment were maintained for at least 18 months.

Lasers for median lobe hyperplasia.

Laser treatment encompases a variety of techniques using different laser wavelengths, application systems, and surgical techniques to achieve contrasting tissue effects such as incision, resection, vaporization, or coagulation. Many studies have proven the clinical efficacy of the various laser techniques for the treatment of benign prostatiuc hyperplasia, including randomized studies versus transurethral prostatectomy (TURP). Recently, long-term follow-up of up to 5 years has demonstrated the durability of the results, although in some of the studies, retreatment rates were higher than after TURP. Median lobes were never seen as a contraindication for treatment in the laser based procedures. Technically, laser treatment techniques such as side-firing transurethral coagulation, contact- and free-beam laser vaporization, interstitial laser coagulation, and the holmium laser-based resection and enucleation are fully suitable for treatment of median lobes. Surprisingly, no studies focussing specifically on laser treatment of median lobes have been published.

Prior transurethral resection does not increase morbidity following real-time ultrasound-guided prostate seed implantation.

PURPOSE: Patients with localized prostate cancer who had a prior open prostatectomy or transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) may be at risk for greater morbidity when treated with brachytherapy. This analysis examines the morbidity following brachytherapy using the real-time method to determine if patients with a history of TURP are at increase risk for developing complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An ultrasound-guided transperineal interactive prostate seed was implanted in 419 patients with T1-T2 prostate cancer. All patients were implanted using a peripheral weighting of sources (75%) with the interior sources placed at least 5 mm from the urethra. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 consisted of 376 patients (89.7%) without a prior TURP, and group 2 consisted of 43 patients (10.3%) who had a TURP prior to their implant. The mean age, prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score, clinical stage, prostate volume, isotope implanted, and number of patients treated with neoadjuvant hormone therapy were comparable for both groups. RESULTS: Median follow-up for group 1 was 12 months and for group 2 was 18 months. No patients suffered from radiation-related proctitis or cystitis in either group of patients. Two patients in group 2 implanted with iodine 125 and who had a history of two prior TURPs developed mild superficial urethral necrosis (SUN). The actuarial freedom from developing superficial urethral necrosis at 4 years was 84% in patients with a history of prior TURP. There were no episodes of SUN in group 1 and no cases of incontinence reported in either group of patients. The actuarial rate of potency was 78% at 2 years. CONCLUSION: Whereas other techniques of seed implantation report incontinence in patients who had a prior open prostatectomy or TURP, the real-time method combined with peripheral loading avoids this complication.

[Low-intensity laser radiation in preoperative preparation of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia]. / Nizkointensivnoe lazernoe izluchenie v predoperatsionooi podgotovke bol'nykh s dobrokachestvennoi giperplaziei prostaty.

Low-intensity laser therapy administered in the form of intravenous blood irradiation, transrectal and transurethral prostatic irradiation and their combination as preoperative preparation and correction of immunity disturbances in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were studied. The response to the treatment was evaluated by positive changes in the immune status and bacterial contamination of the urine and prostatic tissue. Conventional preoperative preparation (uroantiseptics, antibiotics and phytotherapy) fails to correct signs of T-cell immunodeficiency, depression of phagocytic activity of neutrophils, significantly reduce bacteriurea. Laser therapy as intravenous laser blood radiation acts immunomodulatorily on cellular immunity and normalized the proportion of T-helpers of the first and second order (T-suppressors) and neutrophil phagocytosis. The antibacterial effect of this technique on urinary microflora and prostatic tissue is not very high. Local laser therapy is a potent immunostimulator of T- and B-lymphocytes, increased the index of immunoregulatory cells' proportion, activated phagocytosis of neutrophils. It has pronounced antibacterial effect against gram-negative urinary microflora and tissue of the prostate. Combined laser therapy produced the highest immunomodulating action on T-lymphocytes and immunostimulating one on B-lymphocytes, potentiated phagocytic ability of neutrophils, elevated index of the immunoregulatory cells, but was unable to correct their imbalance completely. Antibacterial effects of combined laser therapy were the highest, including the bacterial group Proteus-Providencia. Preoperative low-intensity laser therapy of BPH reduced the number of postoperative pyoinflammatory complications, hospital stay, severity of postoperative period.

Intraprostatic temperature monitoring during transurethral microwave thermotherapy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

PURPOSE: We evaluated whether the results of transurethral microwave thermotherapy improve using high intraprostatic temperatures of 55C or greater. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We accrued 30 men 58 to 85 years old (mean age 69) from the waiting list for transurethral prostatic resection in whom maximum urinary flow was less than 13 ml. per second and Madsen score was greater than 8. According to the Abrams-Griffith nomogram all but 1 patient had obstruction. Before treatment 3 thin temperature probes, each containing 5 sensors in a row, were introduced into the prostate from the perineum and positioned using transurethral ultrasound guidance. The microwave power of the transurethral microwave thermotherapy equipment was set based on the actual temperature in the prostatic tissue. A temperature of at least 55C and often more than 60C was reached at the hottest spot. Treatment duration was 1 hour. Postoperatively an indwelling catheter remained in place for 2 weeks. Patients were followed for 6 months with the first followup after 3 months. RESULTS: At the 3-month followup mean maximum urinary flow had increased from 7.4 to 12.5 ml. per second and the mean Madsen score had decreased from 12.6 to 2.9. At the 6-month followup mean maximum urinary flow was 12.2 ml. per second and the mean Madsen score was 3.4. Using pressure-flow data we divided the patients into responders and nonresponders. In the 18 responders maximum urinary flow had increased from 7.2 to 14.6 ml. per second (103%), the Madsen score had decreased from 12.5 to 1.4 (89%) and detrusor pressure had decreased from 9.2 to 6 kPa. (35%). CONCLUSIONS: High energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy relieved bladder outlet obstruction in 60% of the patients and had a good effect on symptoms. Compared with a previous multicenter study with 40% responders, using the same criteria there were 60% responders in our series. Our results indicate that better control of intraprostatic temperature provides better results, approaching those after transurethral prostatic resection.

Microwave therapy of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Thermotherapy of the prostate proves to be a safe and effective treatment for patients with symptomatic prostatism secondary to BPH. Present treatment regimens yield results and side effects intermediate between drug therapy and prostatectomy. Future enhancements of the thermotherapy technique are likely to improve its results to the level of surgery.

Localized deep microwave hyperthermia in the treatment of poor operative risk patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Non-invasive localized deep microwave hyperthermia was applied as an alternative treatment to surgery in 29 patients with contraindications for prostatectomy. Patients were treated twice weekly, on Mondays and Thursdays, for 1 hour, without sedation on an outpatient basis. All patients tolerated treatment well without secondary effects. The results indicate that localized deep microwave hyperthermia applied by this method is safe and effective in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.