HoLEPs: A Comparative Study of Men With Massive Prostate Volumes ≥150 mL and <150 mL.

OBJECTIVE: To assess outcomes following Holmium Laser Enucleation of Prostate (HoLEP) in men with prostate volumes ≥150cc and compare this to men with prostate volumes ≤150 cc. PATIENTS & METHODS: We analyzed our prospective database of consecutive patients undergoing HoLEP in a single tertiary public hospital between October 2016 and January 2019. We excluded patients with clinically significant prostate cancer or neurogenic bladders. Preoperative prostate volume was measured on MRI or ultrasonography. Perioperative variables and functional outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Of 304 HoLEPs performed, we included 97 patients with prostate volume of ≥150 cc and 186 patients with prostate volume <150 cc. Comparing both cohorts (≥150 cc vs <150 cc): mean age was 71.5 vs 68.3 years, prostate volume 195 cc vs 93 cc, preoperative Qmax 9.6mL/s vs 10mL/s, American Urology Association Symptom Score (IPSS) 21 points vs 20.5 points; mean PSA 13.2µg/L vs 8.8µg/L; laser duration 86 vs 59 minutes; morcellation duration 29 vs 14 minutes; enucleated weight was 124 g vs 60 g. One patient (1%) from the ≥150 cc cohort required a surgical procedure for stress urinary incontinence, and none from the <150 cc cohort, but this did not achieve statistical significance (P = .12). There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative Qmax (32.3 vs 26.4 mL/s; P = .12), IPSS (5.9 points vs 7.3points; P = .23), mean PSA (3.9 µg/L vs 2.2 µg/L; P = .60), stricture incidence (1% vs 2.7%; P = .63), or significant stress urinary incontinence (4.1% vs 0.5%; P = .08). CONCLUSION: Our large series demonstrates that HoLEP is safe and effective in patients with massive prostates (≥150 cc), with similar outcomes compared to patients with prostates <150 cc.

Validation of the days alive and out of hospital outcome measure after emergency laparotomy: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Days alive and out of hospital (DAOH) is a composite, patient-centred outcome measure describing a patient's postoperative recovery, encompassing hospitalisation and mortality. DAOH is the number of days not in hospital over a defined postoperative period; patients who die have DAOH of zero. The Standardising Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) group recommended DAOH as a perioperative outcome. However, DAOH has never been validated in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Here, we validate DAOH after emergency laparotomy and establish the optimal duration of observation. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of patients having emergency laparotomy in England (December 1, 2013-November 30, 2017) were linked to national hospital admission and mortality records for the year after surgery. We evaluated construct validity by assessing DAOH variation with known perioperative risk factors and predictive validity for 1 yr mortality using a multivariate Bayesian mixed-effects logistic regression. The optimal postoperative DAOH period (30 or 90 days) was judged on distributional and pragmatic properties. RESULTS: We analysed 78 921 records. The median 30-day DAOH (DAOH30) was 16 (inter-quartile range [IQR], 0-22) days and the median DAOH90 was 75 (46-82) days. DAOH was shorter in the presence of known perioperative risk factors. For patients surviving the first 30 postoperative days, shorter DAOH30 was associated with higher 1-yr mortality (odds ratio=0.94; 95% credible interval, 0.94-0.94). CONCLUSION: DAOH is a valid, patient-centred outcome after emergency laparotomy. We recommend its use in clinical trials, quality assurance, and quality improvement, measured at 30 days as mortality heavily skews DAOH measured at 90 days and beyond.