Mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs flexible ureteroscopy for 1-2 cm lower pole renal stones: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) and ambulatory tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in the treatment of 1-2 cm lower calyceal renal stones. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent f-URS and mini-PCNL for the treatment of 1-2 cm lower calyceal renal stones between October 2020 and November 2023 were evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. A total of 72 patients were included in the study. All patients underwent a computed tomography renal colic scan preoperatively, on postoperative Day 1 (POD 1), and at 3 months follow-up. We compared perioperative outcomes, including operative time and hospital stay. Additionally, we evaluated follow-up outcomes, such as the stone-free rate (SFR) and complications. All patients were discharged home on the same operative day. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in preoperative baseline data between the two surgical groups. A significantly longer median operative time was reported in the mini-PCNL group (P = 0.04). The median hospital stay was 5 h and 4 h in the mini-PCNL and f-URS groups, respectively (P = 0.14). On POD 1, the SFR, defined as the absence of residual fragments measuring 0 cm, was 50% for mini-PCNL vs 11.1% for f-URS (P < 0.001). When a total cut-off of <4 cm was utilised, the SFR was 75% in the mini-PCNL group vs 22.2% in the f-URS cohort (P < 0.001). At 3 months follow-up, the SFR remained favourable for mini-PCNL at 72.2% vs 37.1% for f-URS (P = 0.003), with a cut-off of 0 cm, and it increased to 86.1% for mini-PCNL vs 65.7% for f-URS (P = 0.04) when a total cut-off of <4 cm was applied. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups. Two patients (5.7%) in the f-URS group required re-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory tubeless mini-PCNL and f-URS are effective treatment options for 1-2 cm lower calyceal renal stones. Both techniques have a comparable hospital stay and complication rates, with a significantly better SFR with mini-PCNL.

Emergency holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP): a novel approach in the management of refractory hematuria for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): a single-institution experience.

INTRODUCTION: Refractory hematuria secondary to prostatic disease typically resolves with conservative management; however, this condition may require hospitalization with extensive measures to control life-threatening bleeding. The aim of this study was to report our experience using holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) as an emergency treatment in this clinical setting. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients that presented to the emergency department with refractory hematuria of prostatic origin from October 2017 to September 2021, for whom hospitalization and conservative management failed to control bleeding. All emergency HoLEP procedures were performed by a single surgeon. Preoperative and intraoperative parameters, as well as perioperative outcomes, were collected and analyzed. Postoperative outcomes included duration of foley catheterization, length of postoperative hospital stay, and hospital readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 40 emergency HoLEP procedures were performed. Our cohort had a median prostate volume of 110.5 cc and a median resected weight of 81 g. Twenty-seven patients (67.5%) were on anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications on admission. The urethral catheter was removed within 1 day in 95% of patients with a successful trial of void (TOV). Moreover, 92.5% of patients were discharged home within 24 h of their procedure. Two patients (5%) experienced clot retention within one-week post-discharge with a 2.5% overall readmission rate. All postoperative parameters, including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum flow rate (Qmax), and post-void residual volume (PVR), showed significant improvement at 1 year follow up. CONCLUSION: Our experience demonstrates that emergency HoLEP is an effective treatment option for patients with refractory hematuria of prostatic origin. Further studies are warranted to consolidate our results.

Safety and efficacy of ambulatory tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of 10-25 mm renal calculi A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ambulatory minipercutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in a totally tubeless exit (without a nephrostomy tube or an internal stent) and tubeless exit (without a nephrostomy tube but with an internal stent) for the treatment of renal calculi 10-25 mm in size. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent mini-PCNL at our institution between September 2018 and September 2022. The study included a cohort of 95 patients diagnosed with renal calculi measuring 10-25 mm. All patients underwent a computed tomography (CT) renal colic scan preoperatively, on postoperative day one (POD 1), and at three-month followup. Patient demographics and outcome parameters were recorded, including stone characteristics, operative time, hospital stay, stone-free rate (SFR), complication rates, and subsequent emergency room (ER) visits. Patients were considered stone-free if they had no fragments or residual fragments measuring <4 mm. RESULTS: The median maximum stone diameter was 16 mm (10-25 mm). Twenty-nine patients (30.5%) had multiple renal calculi. The median operative time was 64 (38-135) minutes. Eighty-six patients (90.5%) underwent a totally tubeless procedure, without a nephrostomy tube or an internal stent. All patients were discharged home on the same operative day with a median hospitalization time of six hours. Seven (7.4%) postoperative ER visits were recorded, and two (2.1%) led to hospital readmission. The frequency of grade I, II, and III Clavien-Dindo complications were 18 (18.9%), one (1.1%), and one (1.1%), respectively. The SFR on POD 1 and three-month followup was 73.7% and 92.6%, respectively. Two patients in the study required retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory tubeless mini-PCNL is a safe and effective treatment option for 10-25 mm renal stones. Experienced institutions can safely adopt ambulatory mini-PCNL as a treatment option without an increased risk of postoperative complications, ER visits, or hospital readmissions.

Efficacy and durability of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in the management of acute and chronic urinary retention A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Our study aimed to assess the efficacy and durability of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in managing acute urinary retention (AUR), neurogenic chronic urinary retention (NCUR), and non-neurogenic chronic urinary retention (NNCUR). We also sought to compare outcomes in patients with preoperative urinary retention (UR) to those without. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis using prospectively gathered data from men who underwent HoLEP at our institution between October 2017 and July 2022. Patient demographics and outcome measures were recorded, including indications for the procedure, median urinary volume drained, or median postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) before catheterization or HoLEP. Chronic urinary retention (CUR) was defined as PVR >300 mL in males able to void; and initial catheter drainage >1000 mL in males unable to void, in the absence of pain. NCUR and NNCUR were differentiated based on the presence of any significant illness or injury with a neurologic impact on the bladder. All patients had postoperative followup visits at one, three, six, and 12 months. Our evaluation included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) assessment, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), PVR, and catheter-free status. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-eight males who underwent HoLEP were included in our study. The UR group consisted of 189 patients (70 AUR, 42 NCUR, and 77 NNCUR), and the lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) group was comprised of 179 individuals. There were no statistically significant differences between the NCUR and NNCUR subgroups regarding demographics and outcomes. At 12 months postoperative, the AUR group had a higher catheter-free rate than the CUR group (p=0.04), and other outcome variables were comparable between the two cohorts. The UR group had a significantly lower QoL score at one month (p=0.01) and a significantly lower IPSS score at one and 12 months (p=0.034 and p=0.018, respectively) than the LUTS cohort. During all followup visits, the UR group had a significantly higher PVR than the LUTS cohort. The successful first trial of void (TOV) rate for the UR and LUTS groups was 81% and 83.2%, respectively. At 12 months postoperative, the catheter-free rate for the UR and LUTS cohorts was 96.3% and 99.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP is an effective and durable treatment for UR with a high catheter-free rate and comparable outcomes when performed to manage LUTS.

Factors predicting stone-free rates after retrograde intrarenal surgery for lower pole kidney stones: A single-center, retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to investigate the factors impacting stone clearance following retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole kidney stones and to determine whether there is a significant relationship between the infundibular pelvic angle (IPA) of the kidney's lower pole and stone fragment clearance. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) for lower pole renal calculi between December 2020 and July 2023 at our institution. Patient demographics and stone parameters were recorded, including stone size, number, volume, density, and IPA. Intraoperative data, including total operative time, lasing time, type of laser used, and stone composition, were collected and analyzed. All patients underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan at three months followup. We recorded the presence of residual stones and the percentage of stone volume reduction. Patients with a stone size ≤3 mm were deemed stone-free. All patients were discharged home on the same operative day. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were included in the study: 71 in the stone-free group (group 1) and 52 in the residual stones group (group 2). On univariate analysis, there were significant differences between the two groups in terms of stone size, IPA, and the type of ureteroscopy used. At three months followup, 96% (24/25) of patients with an IPA <30° had residual stones, compared to 28.6% (28/98) of patients with an IPA >30° (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the intraoperative or postoperative complications between the two groups. On multivariate analysis, IPA and stone size were the only predictive factors for the presence of residual stones. Twelve patients (23.1%) from group 2 required retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: RIRS is an effective treatment option for the management of lower pole kidney stones. IPA, in conjunction with stone size, appears to dictate the stone clearance rates of RIRS for lower pole stones.

Top-down holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) versus traditional HoLEP for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): 1-year outcomes of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The top-down holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) technique recently emerged as a safe and effective modification of traditional HoLEP. In our randomized controlled trial, we compared intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of traditional and top-down HoLEP for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in patients with a prostate size ≥80 g. METHODS: One-hundred patients with BPH and a prostate volume ≥80 cc participated in this prospective randomized controlled trial. Outcome measures were collected and compared, including IPSS, QoL, flow rate, PVR, IIEF-15, PSA, and TRUS prostate volume changes. Perioperative complications were also recorded. All patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in preoperative baseline characteristics between the two surgical groups. The median prostate volume for the traditional and top-down HoLEP groups was 107 and 102 cc, respectively. The operative parameters and postoperative outcomes were comparable for both cohorts. The median enucleation time for traditional HoLEP was 60 min, which was not significantly longer than that of top-down HoLEP (52 min) (p = 0.07). At 3 months follow-up, there was no statistically significant difference in transient stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in the traditional HoLEP (4.1%) versus the top-down HoLEP group (2.2%), (p = 0.61). There were no significant differences in functional and sexual outcomes between the two groups at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The HoLEP procedure significantly improves patients' urinary functional outcomes and has comparable postoperative outcomes regardless of the technique utilized.

Holmium Laser Xpeeda Vaporization vs GreenLight XPS Vaporization of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Obstruction: 1-Year Results from a Randomized Controlled Clinical Study.

Introduction and Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of Holmium Laser Xpeeda Vaporization and GreenLight XPS Vaporization of the prostate in patients with prostate size ≤80 g. Methods: Ninety-two men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate size ≤80 g scheduled for laser prostatectomy were included in this prospective randomized trial. Outcome measures were collected and compared, including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), flow rate, postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), International Index of Erectile Dysfunction (IIEF)-15, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), transrectal ultrasound prostate volume, and catheterization time. Perioperative complications were also recorded. Patients were offered a trial of void (TOV) 3 hours after their procedures. All patients were followed-up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: There were no significant differences in preoperative baseline data between the two surgical groups. Operative parameters and postoperative outcomes were comparable. Effective same-day TOV was noted in 73.1% and 72.7% of the Xpeeda and GreenLight XPS patients, respectively (p = 0.98). All patients were discharged home within 24 hours of their surgeries. The laser energy and postoperative complications were significantly lower in the Xpeeda group (p = 0.002 and p = 0.026, respectively). At 3 months, the PSA levels significantly dropped in both groups (p = 0.002 and p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in functional and sexual outcomes between the two groups at 12 months. Conclusions: Holmium Laser Xpeeda Vaporization and GreenLight XPS Vaporization are safe and effective in the treatment of BPH. Same-day discharge with early TOV is a feasible option. Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT04386941.

Thulium Fiber Laser vs Pulse-Modulated Holmium MOSES Laser in Flexible Ureteroscopy for the Management of Kidney Stones: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.

Introduction and Objective: The study's primary objective was to compare the laser efficiency and clinical outcomes of two widely used systems, the holmium MOSES laser and the thulium fiber laser (TFL), in managing kidney stones. The secondary outcomes were to evaluate the impact of stone composition on laser efficacy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) for solitary renal calculi between December 2020 and August 2022 at our institution and had a 3-month postoperative CT scan. Patient demographics and stone parameters were recorded, including stone site, size, volume, and density. Intraoperative data were collected and analyzed, including total operative time, ureteroscopy time, lasing time, technique, total energy delivered, and stone composition. All patients underwent a CT scan at 3 months follow-up. We recorded the presence of residual stones and the percentage of stone volume reduction. Ablation efficiency was calculated by dividing the energy utilized (J) by the stone volume (mm3). The ablation speed was calculated by dividing the stone volume (mm3) by the lasing time (seconds). Patients with a stone size <4 mm were deemed stone-free. Results: The MOSES and TFL groups comprised 62 and 49 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups for baseline patient demographics or stone characteristics. The two modalities had comparable total energy, laser time, efficacy, and ablation speeds. No differences were detected in stone-free rates or complications between both groups. When dealing with calcium phosphate stones, we observed that the lasing time was significantly shorter with MOSES than TFL (7.95 vs 10.85 minutes, respectively [p = 0.01]). Conclusions: MOSES and TFL laser systems had comparable efficacy for lithotripsy of renal calculi during f-URS; however, calcium phosphate stones had a longer lasing time with TFL. REB Number: 100210.

Same-day trial of void and discharge following standard vs. MOSESTM holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: A single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare perioperative and postoperative outcomes and to assess the safety and feasibility of same-day trial of void (TOV) in patients who underwent standard holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) vs. MOSESTM HoLEP (MoLEP). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients that underwent HoLEP (100 W) or MoLEP (120 W) with same-day catheter removal three hours postoperatively at our institution from August 2018 to September 2021. Patient demographics, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Data were compared as means with standard deviation and medians with interquartile range (IQR) or numbers and percentages. Continuous and categorical variables were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-squared test, respectively. Predictors of shorter enucleation time and failed same-day TOV were investigated. RESULTS: Of the 90 patients included, 28 underwent HoLEP while 62 had MoLEP. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the successful TOV (23 [82%] vs. 58 [93.5%], p=0.1) and readmission rate (3 [10.7%] vs. 1 [1.6%], p=0.08); however, the MoLEP group had a significantly shorter mean enucleation time (p<0.001), mean hemostasis time (p<0.001), mean morcellation time (p=0.003), and lower mean energy used (p<0.001). On the logistic regression model, MoLEP (odds ratio [OR] 0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.007-0.19, p<0.001), lower preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01-1.55, p=0.03), and smaller prostate size (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.09, p<0.001) were independent predictors of shorter enucleation time. History of preoperative retention was the only significant factor associated with a failed same-day TOV (p=0.04). There was no difference in intraoperative or postoperative complication rates or postoperative functional outcomes between the two technologies. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day TOV and discharge are feasible following standard HoLEP and MoLEP, with comparable outcomes; however, the use of MOSESTM technology offered better enucleation efficiency with excellent hemostatic potential. Preoperative retention was the only predictor of failed same-day TOV.

Outcomes of Top-Down Holmium Laser Enucleation of Prostate for Recurrent/Residual Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: One-Year Follow-Up.

Materials and Methods: We carried out a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent top-down HoLEP for the management of recurrent BPH at our institution. Patients who had previously undergone TURP were assigned to group I, while those with no history of prostate surgery were allocated to group II. Preoperative clinical characteristics, enucleation time, resected tissue weight, morcellation time, energy used, and intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded and statistically analyzed. Patients were followed up postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The evaluation included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life assessment (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Q max), postvoid residual urine test (PVR), and continence status. Results: Two hundred and sixty-nine patients were included in this study. Group I consisted of 68 patients with recurrent BPH, while group II included 201 patients. There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative characteristics between both groups. The median enucleation time for group I (67.5 min (25-200)) was not significantly longer than that for group II (60 min (19-165) (p=0.25)). Operative outcomes, including morcellation time, resected weight, catheter duration, and hospital stay, were comparable between both groups. At 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, all urinary functional outcomes showed significant improvement, and there were no significant differences between the two groups. At 3 months' follow-up, two patients in group I and three patients in group II experienced stress urinary incontinence (SUI). At the last follow-up visit, one patient from group I presented with persistent SUI. Conclusions: For managing recurrent and nonrecurrent cases of BPH, top-down HoLEP is safe with comparable urinary functional outcomes. Patients with a history of previous prostate surgery can be counselled that their prior transurethral procedure does not reduce the benefits of HoLEP.

Comparative analysis of MOSESTM technology versus novel thulium fiber laser (TFL) for transurethral enucleation of the prostate: A single-institutional study.

INTRODUCTION: Novel laser technologies have been developed for the minimally invasive surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of MOSESTM technology versus the thulium fiber laser (TFL) in patients with BPH undergoing transurethral enucleation of the prostate. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of eighty-two patients who underwent transurethral enucleation of the prostate using MOSESTM or TFL technologies from August 2020 to September 2021. Preoperative and intraoperative parameters, in addition to postoperative outcomes, were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent transurethral enucleation of the prostate with TFL, while 62 had MOSESTM HoLEP. No statistically significant difference in preoperative characteristics was observed between the groups. Patients in the TFL group had longer median enucleation, hemostasis, and morcellation times (p < 0.001) than those in the MOSESTM cohort. The longer morcellation time of TFL is mostly related to less visibility. The postoperative outcomes IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and post void residual (PVR), were comparable between the groups at 1, 3 and 6 months. The incidence of urge urinary incontinence (p = 0.79), stress urinary incontinence (p = 0.97), and hospital readmission rates (p = 0.1) were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: A satisfactory safety and efficacy profile with comparable postoperative outcomes was demonstrated for both techniques; though, MOSESTM technology was superior to TFL in terms of shorter overall operative time.