Thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review of the current outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: One recent addition to different lasers used for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is the thulium fiber laser (TFL). The purpose of this systematic review is to present the feasibility, safety and efficacy of TFL Enucleation of the Prostate (ThuFLEP). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed®, Scopus® and Cochrane® primary databases were systematically screened. The search strategy used the PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) criteria. Patients should be adults with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) undergoing ThuFLEP. While comparative studies reporting comparison of ThuFLEP to other BPO treatments were included, cohort studies with no comparison group were also accepted. Outcomes including enucleation time and complication rates were reported. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twelve studies met all the predefined criteria and were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Mean operative time and enucleation time ranged from 46.6±10.2 to 104.5±33.6 and from 38.8±17.9 to 66.0±24.9 minutes, respectively. Most of the complications were Grade I or Grade II ones. Although TFL was found to present some advantages over older BPO treatments, its outcomes were comparable with other endoscopic enucleation approaches. CONCLUSIONS: ThuFLEP seems to be a feasible, safe and efficient approach for BPO symptoms management. Limited evidence showed that although ThuFLEP was associated with a reduced total operative time, it was also associated with worse IPSS improvement at 1-year follow-up, when compared with MOSESTM Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP). These findings confirm the well-established opinion that the enucleation technique itself is more important than the technology which is used.

Comparison of urinary incontinence following three different prostate apex disconnection techniques in transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the incidence of urinary incontinence following transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy with three different prostate apex disconnection techniques: semi-separation, pre-separation, and post-separation. The findings aim to provide references for clinical treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 74 patients treated with transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy for prostatic hyperplasia from April 2022 to March 2023. Complete clinical and follow-up data were available for 52 patients. Clinical and follow-up data were collected for these patients. A comparison was made of urinary incontinence following the three different types of prostate apex disconnection in transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy. RESULTS: In this study, the immediate postoperative urinary incontinence rate for transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy was 9.62% (5/52), the short-term incontinence rate was 11.54% (5/52), and the long-term incontinence rate was 9.62% (5/52). The immediate postoperative incontinence rates for semi-separation, pre-separation, and post- separation were 8.33% (1/12), 8.33% (2/24), and 12.5% (2/16), respectively. The short-term incontinence rates for semi-separation, pre-separation, and post-separation were 8.33% (1/12), 8.33% (2/24), and 18.75% (3/16), respectively. The long-term incontinence rates for semi-separation, pre-separation, and post-separation were 8.33% (1/12), 8.33% (2/24), and 12.5% (2/16), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of urinary incontinence following transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy was lower with semi-separation and pre-separation compared to post-separation.

A prospective analysis of thulium laser enucleation in benign prostatic hyperplasia comparing low- and high-power approaches for prostates exceeding 80 g.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the perioperative and functional outcomes of low-power and high-power thulium:YAG VapoEnucleation (ThuVEP) of the prostate for the treatment of large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) (> 80 ml). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective analysis of 80 patients with symptomatic BPO and prostatic enlargement (more than 80 ml) was conducted. They were divided randomly into two groups (40 patients in each group). One group was treated with low-power ThuVEP, and the other group was treated with high-power ThuVEP. All patients were assessed preoperatively and early postoperatively, and 12-month follow-up data were analyzed. The complications were noted and classified according to the modified Clavien classification system. RESULTS: The mean age at surgery was 68 (± 6.1) years, and the mean prostate volume was 112 (± 20.1) cc, and there were no differences between the groups (p = 0.457). The mean operative time was 88.4 ± 11.79 min for group A and 93.4 ± 16.34 min for group B, while the mean enucleation time was 59.68 ± 7.24 min for group A and 63.13 ± 10.75 min for group B. There were no significant differences between the groups regarding catheterization time and postoperative stay. The quality of life (QoL), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoiding residual urine (PVR), and prostate volume improved significantly after treatment and were not significantly different between those treated with the different energies. The incidence of complications was low and did not differ between both the groups. CONCLUSION: Low-power ThuVEP is feasible, safe, and effective with comparable results with high-power ThuVEP in the treatment of BPO.

A historical comparison of thulium fiber laser systems for stone lithotripsy: navigating toward safe and effective parameters.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Medical device companies have introduced new TFL machines, including Soltive (Olympus, Japan), Fiber Dust (Quanta System, Italy), and TFLDrive (Coloplast, France). The primary objective of this study is to compare our initial clinical experiences with TFL using those devices. Through this historical comparison of Thulium Fiber Laser systems for stone lithotripsy, we aim to advance our understanding and approach toward achieving safe and effective TFL parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data for this comparative analysis were extracted from three distinct prospective series that were previously published, outlining our initial clinical experience with the Soltive (Olympus, Japan), FiberDust laser (Quanta System, Italy), and TFLDrive laser (Coloplast, France). Parameters such as stone size, stone density, laser-on time (LOT), and laser settings were meticulously recorded. Additionally, we assessed critical variables such as ablation speed (expressed in mm3/s) and Joules/mm3 for each lithotripsy procedure. RESULTS: A total of 149 patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, 120 patients were subjected to analysis concerning renal stones. Statistically significant differences were observed in the median (IQR) stone volume: 650 (127-6027) mm3 for TFLDrive, 1800 (682.8-2760) mm3 for Soltive, and 1125 (294-4000) mm3 for FiberDust (p: 0.007); while there were no differences regarding stone density among the groups. Significant variations were identified in median (IQR) pulse energy, frequency, and total power. The Soltive group exhibited lower energy levels (0.3 J vs. 0.6 J, p: 0.002) but significantly higher pulse frequency (100 Hz vs. 17.5 Hz, p: 0.003) and total power (24 W vs. 11W, p: 0.001) compared to the other groups. Laser-on time showed no substantial differences across all three groups. Additionally, a statistically significant difference was observed in median J/mm3, with the TFLDrive group using higher values (24 J/mm3, p: 0.001), while the Soltive group demonstrated a higher median ablation speed of 1.16 mm3/s (p: 0.001). The overall complication rate remained low for all groups, with comparable stone-free rates. CONCLUSION: By reducing pulsed frequency, we improved laser efficiency, but smaller volumes lead to decreased efficiency due to increased retropulsion and fragment movement. Further studies are needed to identify and establish the appropriate laser settings for this new technology.

Propensity score-matched analysis comparing perioperative, functional, and safety outcomes between thulium fiber laser and bipolar enucleation of the prostate performed by a single surgeon with two years of follow-up.

PURPOSE: To compare perioperative, functional, and safety outcomes between thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) and bipolar enucleation of the prostate performed by a single surgeon with use of propensity score (PS)-matched analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were from 675 patients, 422 of whom underwent ThuFLEP and bipolar enucleation by a single highly experienced surgeon. ThuFLEP was performed with Fiberlase U1 (IRE Polus Ltd.). Perioperative parameters, safety, and functional outcomes, such as International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), postvoid residual volume (PVR), and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) were assessed. To control for selection bias, a 1:1 PS-matched analysis was carried out using the following variables as covariates: total prostate volume, preoperative IPSS and early sphincter release. RESULTS: Of 422 patients, 370 (87.7%) underwent ThuFLEP and 52 (12.3%) underwent bipolar enucleation. Operation, enucleation, and morcellation time were comparable between groups before and after PS-matched analysis (p=0.954, p=0.474, p=0.362, respectively). Functional parameters (IPSS, QoL, PVR, Qmax) were also comparable between groups at every time point before and after PS matching. Significant improvements in IPSS, QoL score, Qmax, and PVR were observed during the 24-month follow-up period for both ThuFLEP and bipolar enucleation without any significant differences between groups. Early and late postoperative complications before and after PS-matched analysis were similar. CONCLUSIONS: ThuFLEP was comparable to bipolar enucleation in perioperative characteristics, improvement in voiding parameters, and complication rates. Both procedures were shown to be effective and safe in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Experts' recommendations in laser use for the treatment of bladder cancer: a comprehensive guide by the European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Training and Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (TRUST)-Group.

PURPOSE: To identify laser settings and limits applied by experts during laser vaporization (vapBT) and laser en-bloc resection of bladder tumors (ERBT) and to identify preventive measures to reduce complications. METHODS: After a focused literature search to identify relevant questions, we conducted a survey (57 questions) which was sent to laser experts. The expert selection was based on clinical experience and scientific contribution. Participants were asked for used laser types, typical laser settings during specific scenarios, and preventive measures applied during surgery. Settings for a maximum of 2 different lasers for each scenario were possible. Responses and settings were compared among the reported laser types. RESULTS: Twenty-three of 29 (79.3%) invited experts completed the survey. Thulium fiber laser (TFL) is the most common laser (57%), followed by Holmium:Yttrium-Aluminium-Garnet (Ho:YAG) (48%), continuous wave (cw) Thulium:Yttrium-Aluminium-Garnet (Tm:YAG) (26%), and pulsed Tm:YAG (13%). Experts prefer ERBT (91.3%) to vapBT (8.7%); however, relevant limitations such as tumor size, number, and anatomical tumor location exist. Laser settings were generally comparable; however, we could find significant differences between the laser sources for lateral wall ERBT (p = 0.028) and standard ERBT (p = 0.033), with cwTm:YAG and pulsed Tm:YAG being operated in higher power modes when compared to TFL and Ho:YAG. Experts prefer long pulse modes for Ho:YAG and short pulse modes for TFL lasers. CONCLUSION: TFL seems to have replaced Ho:YAG and Tm:YAG. Most laser settings do not differ significantly among laser sources. For experts, continuous flow irrigation is the most commonly applied measure to reduce complications.

Thulium Fiber Laser Versus Holmium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet for Lithotripsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Thulium fiber laser (TFL) emerged as a competitor of holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for the treatment of urinary stones. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy of renal and ureteral stones. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A literature search was conducted using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify reports published until May 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The primary outcome was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria, and data from 1286 and 880 patients who underwent, respectively, Ho:YAG and TFL laser lithotripsy were reviewed. Most studies included ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgeries as procedures, two included percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and one included URS exclusively. Only two studies reported results in pediatric patients. TFL was associated with a higher SFR (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-3.20; p = 0.031) when no residual fragment is considered, but not when SFR refers to the presence of fragments <3 mm (OR 2.48, 95% CI: 0.98-6.29; p = 0.055) or when only Ho:YAG with MOSES is considered (p = 0.068). According to the stones' location, TFL was associated with higher SFRs than Ho:YAG for renal (OR 3.14, 95% CI: 1.69-5.86; p < 0.001) but not for ureteral (p = 0.8) stones. TFL was associated with a lower intraoperative complication rate (OR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.19-0.63; p < 0.001). No difference was found in major (p = 0.4) or overall (p = 0.4) complication rate, operative time (p = 0.051), and laser time (p = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: TFL is a promising laser for the treatment of urinary stones with some advantages over Ho:YAG. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings and optimize the surgical settings. PATIENT SUMMARY: The use of thulium fiber laser rather than holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet permits to reach a higher stone-free rate in stones located in the kidney rather than in the ureter.

Thulium fiber laser vs. holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: results of a prospective randomized non-inferiority trial.

PURPOSE: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) represents the current standard procedure for size-independent surgical therapy of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). With advent of the novel laser technology thulium fiber laser (TFL), we hypothesized that the functional outcome of TFL enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) is non-inferior compared to HoLEP. METHODS: From October 2021 to October 2022, 150 patients with BPO were recruited for the prospective randomized trial in accordance with CONSORT. Stratified randomization into the arms ThuFLEP (n = 74) or HoLEP (n = 76) was carried out. The primary endpoint was non-inferior international prostate symptom score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL) at three months after treatment. Secondary endpoints were rates of complications, peak flow, residual urine and operation times. RESULTS: Preoperative characteristics showed no significant differences. Overall IPSS and QoL improved from 21 to 8 and 4 to 1.5, respectively, after three months of follow-up. No statistically significant differences between ThuFLEP and HoLEP were observed regarding median postoperative IPSS (8.5 vs. 7, p > 0.9), QoL (1 vs. 2, p = 0.6), residual urine (48 vs. 30ml, p = 0.065) and peak flow (19 vs. 17ml/s, p > 0.9). Similarly, safety profile was comparable with no statistically significant differences regarding rate of major complications (5.3 vs. 5.4%, p = 0.5), laser hemostasis time (3 vs. 2min, p = 0.2), use of additive electric coagulation (74 vs. 87%, p = 0.06) or electric coagulation time (8 vs. 8min, p = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective, randomized trial ThuFLEP showed non-inferior results compared to HoLEP in terms of functional outcomes measured by IPSS and QoL as primary endpoint. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00032699 (18.09.2023, retrospectively registered).

Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare Dusting vs Fragmentation Using Thulium Fiber Laser in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.

Objective: To compare the dusting vs fragmentation modes with thulium fiber laser (TFL) in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for upper tract stones using the same fixed low-power settings in both the arms. The primary objective was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) and secondary objectives were to compare mean operating times, hospital stay duration, complication rates, need for secondary procedures, and laser efficacy. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized trial, with patients having proximal ureteral or renal stones of 10-20 mm and planned for RIRS was done at a single institute. A total of 60 consecutively admitted patients with signed consent were included for randomization with 30 patients in each arm of dusting and fragmentation modes. Results: Median age in dusting and fragmentation arms of 41.5 and 45.5 years, median stone size of 10.45 and 12.25 mm, median stone volume of 351.6 and 490.7 mm3, and median stone density of 1263.5 HU in both arms with comparable hospital stay of median of 2 days in both arms. Lasing time was significantly lesser in the fragmentation group (20.5 minutes; interquartile range [IQR] 15.12-31.62) than in the dusting group (34.25 minutes, IQR 26.62-38.62, p < 0.001). Higher ablation speed for fragmentation mode (0.405 mm3/sec, IQR 0.337-0.635) than for dusting mode (0.17 mm3/sec, IQR 0.135-0.325, p < 0.001). SFRs and complication rates were comparable in both the arms. Conclusion: TFL in fragmentation mode has shorter lasing times and better laser efficacy than dusting mode with comparable minimal complications, SFRs, and hospital stay duration. Clinical Trial Registration number: CTRI050827.

Comparison Between Thulium Fiber Laser and High-power Holmium Laser for Anatomic Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis from the REAP Registry.

BACKGROUND: Different lasers have been developed for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia, with no definitively superior technique identified to date. OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical and functional enucleation outcomes in real-world multicentre practice using high-power holmium laser (HP-HoLEP) and thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) for different prostate sizes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The study included 4216 patients who underwent HP-HoLEP or ThuFLEP at eight centers in seven countries between 2020 and 2022. Exclusion criteria were previous urethral or prostatic surgery, radiotherapy, or concomitant surgery. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: To adjust for the bias arising from different characteristics at baseline, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to identify 563 matched patients in each cohort. Outcomes included the incidence of postoperative incontinence, early complications (30-d), and delayed complications, and results for the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), and postvoid residual volume (PVR). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: After PSM, 563 patients in each arm were included. Total operative time was similar between the arms, but enucleation and morcellation times were significantly longer for ThuFLEP. The rate of postoperative acute urinary retention was higher in the ThuFLEP arm (3.6% vs 0.9%; p = 0.005), but the 30-d readmission rate was higher in the HP-HoLEP arm (22% vs 8%; p = 0.016). There was no difference in postoperative incontinence rates (HP-HoLEP:19.7%, ThuFLEP:16.0%; p = 0.120). Rates of other early and delayed complications were low and comparable between the arms. The ThuFLEP group had higher Qmax (p < 0.001) and lower PVR (p < 0.001) than the HP-HoLEP group at 1-yr follow-up. The study is limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study shows that early and delayed outcomes of enucleation with ThuFLEP are comparable to those with HP-HoLEP, with similar improvements in micturition parameters and IPSS. PATIENT SUMMARY: As lasers become readily available for the treatment of enlarged prostates causing urinary bother, urologists should focus on performing good anatomic removal of prostate tissue, with the choice of laser not as important for good outcomes. Patients should be counseled about long-term complications, even when the procedure is being performed by an experienced surgeon.

Super pulsed thulium fiber laser outcomes in retrograde intrarenal surgery for ureteral and renal stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laser lithotripsy using a thulium fiber laser (TFL) has become an effective treatment option for small renal stones with low complication rates. TFL has a higher absorption coefficient, smaller fibers, and better pulse rate capability. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the published evidence regarding TFL's lithotripsy performance in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), for which we primarily assessed the outcomes of stone-free rate, operation time, and complications. We searched different databases from inception to April 2023. We assessed the methodological quality and risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis and assessed heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Twelve published studies evaluated the efficacy of RIRS using a TFL for treating renal and ureteral stones. The meta-analysis revealed a predicted stone-free rate of 89.37% (95% CI: 83.93% to 93.12%), indicating that, on average, approximately 89.37% of patients achieved a stone-free state after treatment. The substantial heterogeneity among the studies was evident, as shown by a Q-value of 33.1174 and a p-value of 0.0003. The I2 value of 69.80% (95% CI: 25.91% to 92.02%) highlighted the proportion of variability attributed to genuine heterogeneity across the studies. Moreover, the H2 value 3.31 (95% CI: 1.35 to 12.53) indicated significant heterogeneity beyond random chance. The estimated overall effect size (logit-transformed) of 2.1289 was highly statistically significant (z = 8.7648, p < 0.0001) with a confidence interval of 1.6528 to 2.6049. The reported complications varied across studies, encompassing Clavien grade I-II complications in most cases, with a subset experiencing more severe Clavien grade III-V complications. Additionally, other studies noted a range of complications, such as haematuria, fever, transient creatinine elevation, and postoperative issues like bleeding, pain, and sepsis. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that RIRS using TFL is an effective and safe treatment option for renal and ureteral stones, with high stone-free and low complication rates. The included studies exhibited a low risk of bias and were of high quality. However, more extensive randomized controlled trials with extended follow-up periods are needed to investigate this technique's efficacy and safety.

Advances in lasers for the minimally invasive treatment of upper and lower urinary tract conditions: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Technological advancements in laser lithotripsy are expanding into numerous fields of urology, like ureteroscopy (URS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and benign and malignant soft-tissue treatments. Since the amount of research regarding lasers in urology has grown exponentially, we present a systematic review of the most recent and relevant advances encompassing all lasers used in urological endoscopic treatment. METHODS: We performed a literature search using PubMed (May 2023) to obtain information about lasers for urological purposes. We included only recent data from published articles between 2021 and 2023 or articles ahead of print. RESULTS: Lasers are widely used in lithotripsy for ureteric, renal, and bladder stones, benign prostate surgery, and bladder and upper tract tumor ablation. While the holmium (Ho:YAG) laser is still predominant, there seems to be more emphasis on pulse modulation and newer lasers such as thulium fiber laser (TFL) and pulsed Tm:YAG laser. CONCLUSION: The use of lasers and related technological innovations have shown increasing versatility, and over time have proven to be invaluable in the management of stone lithotripsy, treatment of benign and malignant prostate diseases, and urothelial tumors. Laser endoscopic treatment is heavily based on technological nuances, and it is essential to know at least the basics of these technologies. Ultimately the choice of laser used depends on its availability, cost, surgeon experience and expertise.

Thulium Laser for the Treatment of Posterior Urethral Valves in Infants.

Objective: Thulium laser (ThL) has become popular in urology, because of its powerful action on tissue, achieving optimal ablation and hemostasis. Aim of our article was to evaluate efficacy of ThL in infants affected by posterior urethral valve (PUV) ablation. Patients and Methods: Clinical charts of 25 infants (age ≤12 months) who underwent PUV ablation were retrospectively reviewed. According to our protocol, all patients performed voiding cystourethrography and cystoscopy 6 to 8 months after initial treatment. Several factors, including age and weight at surgery, operative time, postoperative bleeding, catheterization period, postoperative urinary retention, retreatment for valve remnants, and stricture at follow-up, were evaluated. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were analyzed. Results: Mean age at primary surgery was 4.5 months (5 days-10.5 months) and mean weight at primary surgery was 5.7 kg (2.5-10.3 kg). Mean operative time was 29.5 minutes (range 15-50 minutes). None of the patients experienced intraoperative and postoperative bleeding. In all cases, postoperative catheterization period was 1 day. Residual valves were found in 6 of 25 (24%) patients. No cases of urethral stricture were registered during follow-up (48.4 months, range: 11-95). Analyzing literature data using other techniques, complication rate of ThL PUV ablation seems lower than standard treatments (electrofulguration, cold knife) and comparable with those reported with other laser techniques. Conclusion: PUV ablation with ThL has proven to be feasible and safe in infants. Further studies are needed to define the real effectiveness of this laser technology in PUV ablation. Miniaturized instruments and ThL technology make early PUV treatment feasible also in low body weight newborns.

A randomized trial of holmium laser vs thulium laser vs bipolar enucleation of large prostate glands.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome and morbidity of bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate (B-TUEP) and thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) with those of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in the treatment of large symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) through a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (NCT03916536). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 155 patients were recruited from a single centre between February 2019 and August 2020. All had BPO, with a prostate volume ≥80 ml. Patients were randomly assigned to HoLEP, ThuLEP or B-TUEP using computer-generated random tables in a 1:1:1 ratio. Participants, investigators and surgeons were blinded to group assignment until the date of the operation. Thereafter, the patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax ) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included assessment of other functional urinary variables, peri-operative records, and adverse events. RESULTS: There were 138 and 120 patients available for analysis at 6 and 12 months. There was no significant difference in Qmax between the groups at 6 and 12 months (P = 0.4 and P = 0.7, respectively), and no significant difference regarding International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) or postvoid residual urine volume (PVR). The median (interquartile range) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reductions (ng/ml) were similar in the three groups at last follow-up point (4.7 [2.2-7.1]; 5.6 [2.3-9.5] and 5 [3.4-10] after HoLEP, ThuLEP and B-TUEP, respectively). Differences in enucleation time, enucleation efficiencies and auxiliary manoeuvres were statistically insignificant (P = 0.1, 0.8 and 0.07, respectively). At 1 year, patients with prostate volumes >120 ml showed significant IPSS improvement in favour of HoLEP and ThuLEP (P = 0.01). Low- and high-grade adverse effects were recorded in 31 and five cases, respectively, with no statistically significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that ThuLEP and B-TUEP are as safe and effective as HoLEP for the treatment of large-sized BPO. Significant PSA reductions indicate that there was effective adenoma enucleation with all three approaches. The study provides objective evidence that endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is a technique rather than energy dependent procedure.

[Comparison of efficacy and safety of transurethral thulium laser vapoenucleation of prostate and transurethral thulium laser enucleation of prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia].

Objective: To compare early outcomes between transurethral thulium laser vapoenucleation of prostate and transurethral thulium laser enucleation of prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods: Retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 1 638 BPH patients admitted to the Department of Urology of Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from January 2018 to December 2021. There were 916 patients underwent transurethral thulium laser vapoenucleation of prostate (ThuVEP group) and 722 patients underwent transurethral thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP group). The operation time, eliminated tissue weight, surgical complications, duration of post-operative catheter implantation were compared between the two groups. The improvement of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Quality of Life Index (QoL), maximum uroflow rate (Qmax) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR) at 1 month after operation was compared between the two groups. Results: There were no significant differences in age, preoperative and 1-month postoperative prostate volume, IPSS score, QoL score, Qmax, and PVR between the ThuVEP and ThuLEP group (all P>0.05). There were no significant differences in perioperative indicators such as operation time, cutting or enucleation time, tissue crushing time, tissue weight, hemoglobin change, catheter indwelling time, and postoperative hospital stay between ThuVEP group and ThuLEP group (all P>0.05). The incidence of minor gross hematuria after extubation in the ThuVEP group was 7.8% (56/916), which was lower than 9.4% (65/722) in the ThuLEP group (P=0.026); the incidence of temporary incontinence at 1 month after surgery was 5.2% (38/916) in ThuVEP group, lower than 11.9% (86/722) in ThuLEP group (P<0.001). A total of 3 patients (0.4%) in ThuLEP group required operative intervention for severe post-operation bleeding, but none of ThuVEP group suffered from this kind of surgical complications. Conclusions: ThuVEP has similar efficacy with ThuLEP for the treatment of BPH. ThuVEP can significantly reduce the incidence of post-operation temporary urine incontinence, and has much superiority in stanching bleeding.

Experts' recommendations in laser use for the endoscopic treatment of prostate hypertrophy: a comprehensive guide by the European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Training-Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (T.R.U.S.T.)-Group.

PURPOSE: To identify expert laser settings for BPH treatment and evaluate the application of preventive measures to reduce complications. METHODS: A survey was conducted after narrative literature research to identify relevant questions regarding laser use for BPH treatment (59 questions). Experts were asked for laser settings during specific clinical scenarios. Settings were compared for the reported laser types, and common settings and preventive measures were identified. RESULTS: Twenty-two experts completed the survey with a mean filling time of 12.9 min. Ho:YAG, Thulium fiber laser (TFL), continuous wave (cw) Tm:YAG, pulsed Tm:YAG and Greenlight™ lasers are used by 73% (16/22), 50% (11/22), 23% (5/22), 13.6% (3/22) and 9.1% (2/22) of experts, respectively. All experts use anatomical enucleation of the prostate (EEP), preferentially in one- or two-lobe technique. Laser settings differ significantly between laser types, with median laser power for apical/main gland EEP of 75/94 W, 60/60 W, 100/100 W, 100/100 W, and 80/80 W for Ho:YAG, TFL, cwTm:YAG, pulsed Tm:YAG and Greenlight™ lasers, respectively (p = 0.02 and p = 0.005). However, power settings within the same laser source are similar. Pulse shapes for main gland EEP significantly differ between lasers with long and pulse shape modified (e.g., Moses, Virtual Basket) modes preferred for Ho:YAG and short pulse modes for TFL (p = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Ho:YAG lasers no longer seem to be the mainstay of EEP. TFL lasers are generally used in pulsed mode though clinical applicability for quasi-continuous settings has recently been demonstrated. One and two-lobe techniques are beneficial regarding operative time and are used by most experts.

En Bloc Resection of Bladder Tumors (ERBT) using different lasers - Hybrid and Holmium Laser.

INTRODUCTION: The En-bloc Resection of Bladder Tumors (ERBT) is a method that offers more benefits compared to the traditional Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumor (TURBT) (1, 2). Recent studies have shown that ERBT offers better pathological analysis and oncological outcomes (3-6). Thulium and holmium are the most frequently used lasers for this procedure, with the hybrid laser being a new addition that combines thulium and diode to improve hemostatic properties (5, 7-9). OBJECTIVE: This report aims to discuss the use of two types of lasers, hybrid and holmium, for ERBT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two case studies were conducted. The first case featured a 68-year-old male with two tumors measuring 1.5cm and 2cm. The hybrid laser was used for the procedure. The second case involved a 70-year-old female with a 5cm tumor on the posterior bladder wall, and holmium laser was used with morcellation of the tumor. The quality of histopathological analysis was evaluated. The perioperative data and the entire procedure of the two cases were documented in a step-by-step video. RESULTS: Both lasers demonstrated excellent results without technical difficulties. There was no bleeding, and both patients were discharged with one day of hospitalization. The detrusor muscle was present without artifacts, and the morcellation did not affect the analysis. The first case showed a pT1G3, and the second case showed a pT2 urothelial carcinoma. The hybrid laser exhibited superior hemostatic capacity compared to the holmium laser. CONCLUSION: ERBT can use hybrid or holmium lasers without affecting histopathological analysis, even with morcellation.