[Urinary incontinence after HOLEP: Incidence, evolution and predictive factors]. / Incontinence urinaire après énucléation endoscopique de la prostate au laser Holmium : fréquence, évolution, et facteurs prédictifs de survenue.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the early morbidity after HOLEP, the urinary incontinence in particular, and specify its different types, evolution, and predictive factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted an observational, analytical, retrospective, monocentric study including all patients undergoing surgery for benign prostatic hypertrophy (HBP) by HoLEP between November 2015 and January 2017. The data were collected pre-, per- and postoperatively. The follow-up was for 6 months. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy one patients were included. 23 patients (14.6%) had a complication according to Clavien-Dindo classification [4]: 19 (83%) Clavien 2, 1 (4%) Clavien 3b et 3 (13%) Clavien 4. At one month of the surgery, 64 (42.7%) patients had urinary incontinence of which 55 (86.1%) presented pure stress urinary incontinence. 18 (32.7%) were still incontinent at 6 months of the surgery. The delivered amount of energy during the surgery and the preoperative IIEF5 score were statistically significantly associated with the occurrence rate of stress urinary incontinence. There was no correlation between the surgeon's learning curve and the occurrence of incontinence. CONCLUSION: The occurrence rate of urinary incontinence post HoLEP might be related to the adopted surgical technique ; It is crucial to keep the patient well informed of the risk of this complication postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

[Are the UroLift(®) implants an alternative for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia? Short-term results and predictive factors of failure]. / La pose d'implants intra-prostatiques UroLift(®) est-elle une alternative chez les patients ayant une hyperplasie bénigne de la prostate ? Résultats initiaux et facteurs prédictifs d'échec.

OBJECTIVE: To report the results of UroLift(®) implants after a 2-year experience in the technique. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The procedure was proposed between February 2012 and April 2014 in patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia, as an alternative to standard endoscopic ablation techniques. Evaluation of BPH related symptoms relied on the IPSS and IPSS-QoL self-questionnaires, as well as on maximum uroflow (Qmax). Evaluation of erectile and ejaculatory functions relied on the IIEF5 and MSHQ-EjD self-questionnaires, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 23 patients were treated during this period. Median age was 66 years [53-78]. Median prostate volume was 38mL [20-80]. Preoperative IPSS and IPSS-QoL were 20 [9-29] and 5 [3-6], respectively. No severe adverse event was observed postoperatively. Median follow-up was 14 [5-31] months. At the end of follow-up, 19 (83%) patients reported sustained symptomatic improvement without any additional treatment. Median IPSS and IPSS-QoL were improved significantly (11 [1-27] and 2 [0-6], P<0.0001), with however no significant improvement in Qmax. Four patients needed additional treatment during the first postoperative year. Among them, 3 had a prostate volume>60mL. No patient reported retrograde ejaculation or worsened erectile function. CONCLUSIONS: UroLift(®) implants allowed symptomatic improvement in more than 80% of the patients after 1-year follow-up. A high prostate volume may potentially be predictive of symptomatic failure. LEVEL OF PROOF: 5.

[Prebiopsy multiparametric MRI of the prostate: the end of randomized biopsies?]. / IRM mutiparamétrique de la prostate avant biopsies : la fin des biopsies systématisées ?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the value of multiparametric MRI-targeted prostate biopsies in patients with suspected low-risk prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Patients with normal digital rectal examination and a PSA level between 4 and 10 ng/mL were prospectively included. A multiparametric MRI of the prostate was performed prospectively before the biopsies. 12-core randomized biopsies were performed, with additional targeted samples in each suspicious area identified on MRI. Detected cancers and their histological characteristics were compared between those two biopsy protocols. A micro focal cancer (MFC) was defined by the presence of less than 4mm of Gleason score 3+3 cancer on a single core. RESULTS: Seventy-one consecutive patients were included. The overall detection rate was of 53% (38/71). It was of 70% (26/37) in the presence of suspicious area on MRI versus 35% (12/34) in the absence of any suspicious area (P=0.004). MRI-targeted biopsies alone detected three cancers, none of which was a MFC. 12-core biopsies alone detected 14 cancers, including ten MFC (71%). In 21 patients, prostate cancer was detected by both the MRI-targeted and 12-core biopsies. The Gleason score in the MRI-targeted area was the highest Gleason score in 90% of the cases. It was high (>6) in 76% (16/21) of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-targeted biopsies detected less micro focal cancers than randomized 12-core biopsies. They did not seem however to decrease the detection of clinically significant cancers.