Convective Water Vapour Energy Ablation (Rezum®) versus Prostatic Urethral Lift (Urolift®); A 2-Year Prospective Study.

Introduction To compare the clinical outcomes and complication rates of Convective Water Vapour Energy Ablation (Rezum®) and Prostatic Urethral Lift (Urolift®). To identify predictive factors for treatment failures in both treatments. Materials & Methods Prospective clinico-epidemiological data of patients who underwent Urolift® or Rezum® in a single institution for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) was collected. The choice of intervention depended on the preference of the patients after patient-centric discussions. Results From October 2019 to October 2022, 86 patients underwent Rezum® and 62 patients underwent Urolift®. Rezum® involved a longer indwelling catheter duration (12.38±5.548 versus 1.39±3.010 days, p<0.001) compared to Urolift®. Rezum® was associated with more complications compared to Urolift® (36 (41.9%) versus 10 (16.1%) cases, p<0.001). Rezum® had more cases of hematuria (17 (19.8%) versus 4 (6.5%) cases (p=0.022)) and urinary tract infections (27 (31.4%) versus 3 (4.8%) cases, p<0.001)), compared to Urolift®. There were no significant differences in Clavien-Dindo Grade 3-5 complications between the interventions. Urolift® was associated with higher re-operation rates (5 (8.1%) versus 0 (0%) cases, p=0.010) compared Rezum®. Rezum® had higher anti-cholinergic usage rates compared to Urolift® post-operation (22 (25.6%) versus 8 (12.9%) cases, p=0.024). Both interventions showed improvement in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Quality of Life score, and peak velocity flow over the 2 years with no significant difference between the two. Based on receiver operating characteristic curve, pre-operation IPSS ≥ 16 had 95.7% sensitivity and 38.4% specificity to predict the probability of treatment failures after the interventions. Conclusions There was no difference in clinical outcomes of patients who underwent Rezum® and Urolift®. However, patients who had undergone Rezum® faced more minor complications and more required anti-cholinergic medications. Lastly, physicians should note that patients with IPSS≥16 would unlikely benefit from either intervention.

Defining minimal invasive surgical therapy for benign prostatic obstruction surgery: Perspectives from a global knowledge, attitude, and practice survey.

Objective: To scrutinize the definitions of minimal invasive surgical therapy (MIST) and to investigate urologists' knowledge, attitudes, and practices for benign prostatic obstruction surgeries. Methods: A 36-item survey was developed with a Delphi method. Questions on definitions of MIST and attitudes and practices of benign prostatic obstruction surgeries were included. Urologists were invited globally to complete the online survey. Consensus was achieved when more than or equal to 70% responses were "agree or strongly agree" and less than or equal to 15% responses were "disagree or strongly disagree" (consensus agree), or when more than or equal to 70% responses were "disagree or strongly disagree" and less than or equal to 15% responses were "agree or strongly agree" (consensus disagree). Results: The top three qualities for defining MIST were minimal blood loss (n=466, 80.3%), fast post-operative recovery (n=431, 74.3%), and short hospital stay (n=425, 73.3%). The top three surgeries that were regarded as MIST were Urolift® (n=361, 62.2%), Rezum® (n=351, 60.5%), and endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) (n=332, 57.2%). Consensus in the knowledge section was achieved for the superiority of Urolift®, Rezum®, and iTIND® over transurethral resection of the prostate with regard to blood loss, recovery, day surgery feasibility, and post-operative continence. Consensus in the attitudes section was achieved for the superiority of Urolift®, Rezum®, and iTIND® over transurethral resection of the prostate with regard to blood loss, recovery, and day surgery feasibility. Consensus on both sections was achieved for EEP as the option with the better symptoms and flow improvement, lower retreatment rate, and better suitable for prostate more than 80 mL. Conclusion: Minimal blood loss, fast post-operative recovery, and short hospital stay were the most important qualities for defining MIST. Urolift®, Rezum®, and EEP were regarded as MIST by most urologists.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative first- and second-line treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgical therapies, such as water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) and prostatic urethral lift (PUL), are typically second-line options for patients in whom medical management (MM) failed but who are unwilling or unsuitable to undergo invasive transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). However, the incremental cost-effectiveness of WVTT or PUL as first- or second-line therapy is unknown. We evaluated the incremental cost-effectiveness of alternative first- and second-line treatments for patients with moderate-to-severe benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in Singapore to help policymakers make subsidy decisions based on value for money. METHODS: We considered six stepped-up treatment strategies, beginning with MM, WVTT, PUL or TURP. In each strategy, patients requiring retreatment advance to a more invasive treatment until TURP, which may be undergone twice. A Markov cohort model was used to simulate transitions between BPH severity states and retreatment, accruing costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a lifetime horizon. RESULTS: In moderate patients, strategies beginning with MM had similar cost and effectiveness, and first-line WVTT was incrementally cost-effective to first-line MM (33,307 SGD/QALY). First-line TURP was not incrementally cost-effective to first-line WVTT (159,361 SGD/QALY). For severe patients, WVTT was incrementally cost-effective to MM as a first-line treatment (30,133 SGD/QALY) and to TURP as a second-line treatment following MM (6877 SGD/QALY). TURP was incrementally cost-effective to WVTT as a first-line treatment (48,209 SGD/QALY) in severe patients only. All pathways involving PUL were dominated (higher costs and lower QALYs). CONCLUSION: Based on the common willingness-to-pay threshold of SGD 50,000/QALY, this study demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of WVTT over MM as first-line treatment for patients with moderate or severe BPH, suggesting it represents good value for money and should be considered for subsidy. PUL is not cost-effective as a first- nor second-line treatment. For patients with severe BPH, TURP as first-line is also cost-effective.

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a non-cancerous enlargement of the prostate, common among older men. Its symptoms include difficulties with starting and completing urination, incontinence, frequent and urgent need to urinate. Minimally invasive procedures, such as water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) and prostatic urethral lift (PUL), are typically offered as second-line options to patients for whom medication has failed but who are unwilling or unsuitable to undergo invasive surgery (transurethral resection of the prostate, TURP). However, whether offering these procedures as first-line options represents good value for money (i.e. cost-effectiveness) is an open question. To address this question and inform subsidy decisions in Singapore, we investigated six stepped-up treatment strategies which differ in first- and second-line treatments. For each strategy, we simulated healthcare costs and quality of life for a cohort of moderate and severe BPH patients over their lifetime, considering the possibility of treatment-related adverse effects and multiple rounds of retreatment. The incremental cost of a unit improvement in quality of life for a strategy relative to the next most expensive one was compared against a willingness-to-pay threshold to determine cost-effectiveness. We found that WVTT was cost-effective relative to medication as a first-line treatment for patients with moderate or severe BPH, suggesting it represents good value for money and should be considered for subsidy. PUL was not cost-effective as first- nor second-line treatment. TURP is cost-effective as first-line for severe BPH patients only.

Does addition of aromatherapy and music help to reduce pain and anxiety during shockwave lithotripsy compared to standard analgesia alone? A randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of aromatherapy with lavender oil alone, and in combination with music, on pain and anxiety during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for kidney stones. METHODS: This was a single-centre prospective, randomised controlled trial. The subjects were block randomised into 3 study groups, Group 1: Control; Group 2: Aromatherapy only; Group 3: Aromatherapy and music. All subjects were given patient-controlled intravenous alfentanil as standard analgesia. The primary outcome measures were pain and anxiety scores using visual analogue scale (VAS) and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. RESULTS: Ninety patients were recruited and randomised prospectively into Group 1 (n = 30), Group 2 (n = 30), and Group 3 (n = 30). For pain outcome, both Group 2 and Group 3 showed a trend towards lower mean VAS pain scores of 2.73 in both groups compared to the control with a mean VAS score of 3.50, but it was not statistically significant (p = 0.272). There was no significant difference in anxiety scores between groups post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our study was unable to show a significant improvement in pain relief and anxiety when aromatherapy with lavender oil was added to standard analgesia alone during shockwave lithotripsy. There was also no difference when aromatherapy was combined with music.

An in vitro Comparative Assessment of Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscopes Using a Standardized Ureteroscopy Training Model.

INTRODUCTION: Perceived benefits like decreased contamination rates and reduced postoperative incidence of complications after urolithiasis surgery have led to increased adoption of single-use flexible ureteroscopes (su-fURS). Using a validated, standardized simulator model with enhanced "fluoroscopic" capabilities, we performed an in vitro comparative assessment of four commercially available models of su-fURS. Both objective and subjective parameters were assessed in this study. METHODS: Two standardized tasks, (1) exploration of the model's kidney collecting system and (2) repositioning of a stone fragment from the upper renal to lower renal pole were assigned to participants, who performed these tasks on all four scopes. Four models of su-fURS (Boston LithoVue, PUSEN PU3033A, REDPINE, INNOVEX EU-ScopeTM) were assessed, with task timings as end-points for objective analysis. Cumulative "fluoroscopic" time was also recorded as a novel feature of our enhanced model. Post-task questionnaires evaluating specific components of the scopes were distributed to document subjective ratings. RESULTS: Both subjective and objective performances (except stone repositioning time) across all four su-fURS demonstrated significant differences. However, objective performance (task timings) did not reflect subjective scope ratings by the participants (Rs < 0.6). Upon Kruskal-Wallis H test with post hoc analyses, REDPINE and INNOVEX EU-ScopeTM were the preferred su-fURS as rated by the participants, with overall scope scores of 9.00/10 and 9.57/10. CONCLUSIONS: Using a standardized in vitro simulation model with enhanced fluoroscopic capabilities, we demonstrated both objective and subjective differences between models of su-fURS. However, variations in perception of scope features (visibility, image quality, deflection, maneuverability, ease of stone retrieval) did not translate into actual technical performance. Eventually, the optimal choice of su-fURS fundamentally lies in individual surgeon preference, as well as cost-related factors.

Is transurethral needle ablation of prostate out of fashion? Outcomes of single session office-based transurethral needle ablation of prostate in patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Purpose: Transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) is a minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Compared to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), office-based TUNA is an attractive alternative as it is minimally invasive and avoids general anaesthesia. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of single session office-based TUNA. Materials and Methods: Data of 121 patients who had undergone TUNA was retrieved from June 2008 to March 2017. Patients were followed-up with visits at 1, 3, 6, and 12-months with the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) scoring and uroflowmetry. Results: Patients were 39 to 85 years old. The prostate volumes were 20.00 to 96.90 mL with a median of 26.95 mL. The median IPSS score pre-TUNA was 19, median QOL score pre-TUNA was 4 and median maximum urinary flow (Qmax) pre-TUNA was 10.3 mL/s. There is 65% improvement of IPSS post-TUNA (p<0.001). There is 75% improvement of QOL post-TUNA QOL (p<0.001). There is 35% improvement of Qmax post-TUNA Qmax (p<0.001). The mean relapse-free survival for TUNA is 6.123 years. The 1st, 3rd, and 5th year relapse-free survival rate were 91.7%, 76.6% and 63.7% respectively. Conclusions: Our study is the first to investigate the use of a single-setting office-based TUNA requiring minimal sedation in the Asian community. Complication rates were low in our series, with no associated mortality. When applied to selected patients, TUNA is an effective and reasonably safe alternative for the treatment of symptomatic BPH.

A Rare Subcutaneous Manifestation of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

We report a rare case of advanced metastatic renal cell carcinoma which initially presented to the clinic with back and forehead lumps. Ultrasound imaging of the lumps and later of the abdomen picked up a right renal tumour which led to further computed tomography and bone scans. The bone scan confirmed that the forehead lump was a calvarial metastasis and such a presentation for metastatic RCC is very rare which bears a significantly poorer prognosis.