Репозиторий Университета

© 2019, Springer Nature B.V. Objectives: Various techniques can be used for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP): removal of all nodes as a single unit (en bloc) or a step-by-step removal of adenomatous nodes (two- and three-lobe techniques). The objective of this study was to perform a comparative analysis of en bloc and two-lobe techniques for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP). Methods: Retrospective assessment included patients with bladder outlet obstruction (IPSS > 20, Qmax < 10) secondary to BPH treated from January 2013 to December 2018. All the patients were assessed prior to surgery, as well as at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery. Results: The data of 1115 patients who underwent HoLEP or ThuFLEP were analyzed. Two techniques were used: en bloc (406 patients) and two-lobe (709 patients). Mean prostate volumes were comparable between groups. Mean surgery times (68.8 ± 30.6 min vs 67.4 ± 30.1 min; p = 0.604) and enucleation rates (1.9 ± 0.74 g/min vs 1.9 ± 0.69 g/min; p = 0.217) were also comparable. Morcellation rate was lower in en bloc patients with prostate > 150 cc (2.8 ± 1.1 g/min vs 3.7 ± 2.3 g/min; p < 0.001). At 6 months, no differences in functional outcomes (IPSS, PVR, Qmax and QoL) were found. Conclusions: Outcomes and complication rates of en bloc and two-lobe EEP techniques were comparable. En bloc technique was found to have less favorable outcomes in morcellation rate for prostates > 150 cc. The choice of the technique should depend on surgeon’s preferences.

© 2018 The Author(s). Background: The impact of number of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate techniques (holmium laser enucleation - HoLEP for example) on erectile function have already been investigated. However, the thulium-fiber laser, in this setting remains unstudied. In this study, we compared sexual function outcomes in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) treated with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or thulium-fiber laser enucleation (ThuFLEP). Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent transurethral resection and endoscopic enucleation of the prostate for BPH; inclusion criteria was the presence of infravesical obstruction (IPSS > 20, Qmax < 10 mL/s). Erectile function (EF) was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) both prior to endoscopic examination, and six months after. Results: A total of 469 patients with BPH were included in the study; of these, 211 underwent to ThuFLEP, and 258 TURP. Preoperative IIEF-5 in TURP and ThuFLEP groups were 11.7 (±4.5) and 11.1 (±5.0), respectively (p = 0.17). At six month the IIEF-5 score was unchanged (p = 0.26 and p = 0.08) and comparable in both groups (p = 0.49). However, mean IIEF-5 score shown significant increase of 0.72 in ThuFLEP group, comparing to decrease of 0.24 in TURP patients (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Both TURP and ThuFLEP are effective modalities in the management of infravesical obstruction due to BPH. At six months follow-up after surgery, both techniques lead to comparable IIEF-5 score. However, our results demonstrated that the ThuFLEP is more likely to preserve the erectile function leading to increase of IIEF-5 at six months in contrast to TURP which lead to slight drop in IIEF-5 score.

© 2018 IEEE. Authors describe new effect of laser radiation in endoscopic urological surgery (BPH enucleation, en-bloc removal of bladder cancer, stricture endotomy): two-phase jet - a result of superintensive boiling in the area of laser radiation absorption and consisting of steam-gas microbubbles and hot water. In this case, the area of thermal influence appears significantly more, than thickness of a layer in which laser radiation is absorbed. Cutting soft tissue, the jet coagulates section walls due to heat generated at steam condensation. The same jet is formed behind the macrobubble, which is formed in liquid (Moses effect), because of boiling.

© 2018 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel. Background: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered to be the standard treatment for patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) ≤80 mL. However, up to 14.7% of the patients require secondary TURP due to recurrent BPO. The aim of our study was to describe specific features of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) in patients with recurrent BPO after previous prostate surgery. Materials and Methods: A total of 768 consecutive patients from our prospective collected database were retrospectively reviewed and divided into 4 groups: group A (489 patients) and group C (253 patients) underwent primary HoLEP and ThuLEP treatment, while group B (17 patients) and D (9 patients) included patients with recurrent BPO who were treated with HoLEP and ThuLEP, respectively. Results: There were no significant differences in preoperative parameters between the groups at primary (A and C) and secondary (B and D) treatment except their age. At 6-month follow-up, voiding parameters and symptom scores showed statistically significant improvements compared to baseline without differences between the groups. The mean operative time was comparable between the groups and did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Laser enucleation for the treatment of recurrent BPO is feasible and seems to be a safe and effective procedure.

© Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Introduction: Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) has been recognized as a viable treatment modality for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and functional outcomes of three different techniques of EEP, including monopolar enucleation (MEP), holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), and thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP). Methods: The study consisted of a retrospective comparison of pre- and postoperative parameters in men undergoing three types of EEP: MEP, HoLEP, and ThuLEP. Functional parameters were evaluated before and 6 months after surgery, which included the International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum flow rate, postvoid residual volume, prostate volume, and sodium levels of all patients. Results: A total of 551 men with the mean age of 67.1 years were included in the study. Of these, MEP was performed on 95 patients, HoLEP was performed on 254 patients, and ThuLEP on 202 patients. The mean mass of morcellated tissue obtained during the three techniques did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). Mean procedure times of ThuLEP and HoLEP were shorter than MEP demonstrating 72, 76, and 86 minutes, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean catheterization time following laser EEPs was shorter than MEP as shown by 1.3, 1.3, and 3.8 days, respectively (p < 0.01). Hospital stay times of HoLEP and ThuLEP were shorter than MEP demonstrated by 3.3, 3.4, and 6.9 days, respectively (p < 0.01). Patients after MEP had significant decrease in postoperative hemoglobin and sodium levels. All the groups showed statistically significant improvement in the aforementioned parameters following treatment. Conclusions: Both techniques of laser enucleation proved to be efficacious in the management of BPH. MEP of the prostate seems to be a highly promising addition to the list of enucleation techniques and was determined to be an effective and acceptable procedure, despite a higher complication rate.