Holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention

Christopher D. Jaeger, Christopher R. Mitchell, Lance A. Mynderse, Amy Krambeck

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate short-term outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention (CUR). Patients and Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP or PVP at our institution over a 3-year period. CUR was defined as a persistent post-void residual urine volume (PVR) of >300 mL or refractory urinary retention requiring catheterisation. Results: We identified 72 patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP and 31 who underwent PVP. Preoperative parameters including median catheterisation duration (3 vs 5 months, P = 0.71), American Urological Association Symptom Index score (AUASI; 18 vs 21, P = 0.24), and PVR (555 vs 473 mL, P = 0.096) were similar between the HoLEP and PVP groups. The HoLEP group had a larger prostate volume (88.5 vs 49 mL, P < 0.001) and higher PSA concentration (4.5 vs 2.4 ng/mL, P = 0.001). At median 6-month follow-up, 71 (99%) HoLEP patients and 23 (74%) PVP patients were catheter-free (P < 0.001). Of the voiding patients, postoperative AUASI (3 vs 4, P = 0.06), maximum urinary flow rate (23 vs 18 mL/s, P = 0.28) and PVR (56.5 vs 54 mL, P = 1.0) were improved in both groups. Conclusions: Both HoLEP and PVP are effective at improving urinary parameters in men with CUR. Despite larger prostate volumes, HoLEP had a 99% successful deobstruction rate, thus rendering patients catheter-free.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)295-299
Number of pages5
JournalBJU International
Volume115
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Volatilization
Urinary Retention
Solid-State Lasers
Prostatic Hyperplasia
Prostate
Catheterization
Catheters
Residual Volume

Keywords

  • laser therapy
  • prostate
  • prostatic hyperplasia
  • transurethral prostatectomy
  • transurethral resection of prostate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention. / Jaeger, Christopher D.; Mitchell, Christopher R.; Mynderse, Lance A.; Krambeck, Amy.

In: BJU International, Vol. 115, No. 2, 01.02.2015, p. 295-299.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4678aa3ecac3424b8ee7e349f1c9636f,
title = "Holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention",
abstract = "Objectives: To evaluate short-term outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention (CUR). Patients and Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP or PVP at our institution over a 3-year period. CUR was defined as a persistent post-void residual urine volume (PVR) of >300 mL or refractory urinary retention requiring catheterisation. Results: We identified 72 patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP and 31 who underwent PVP. Preoperative parameters including median catheterisation duration (3 vs 5 months, P = 0.71), American Urological Association Symptom Index score (AUASI; 18 vs 21, P = 0.24), and PVR (555 vs 473 mL, P = 0.096) were similar between the HoLEP and PVP groups. The HoLEP group had a larger prostate volume (88.5 vs 49 mL, P < 0.001) and higher PSA concentration (4.5 vs 2.4 ng/mL, P = 0.001). At median 6-month follow-up, 71 (99{\%}) HoLEP patients and 23 (74{\%}) PVP patients were catheter-free (P < 0.001). Of the voiding patients, postoperative AUASI (3 vs 4, P = 0.06), maximum urinary flow rate (23 vs 18 mL/s, P = 0.28) and PVR (56.5 vs 54 mL, P = 1.0) were improved in both groups. Conclusions: Both HoLEP and PVP are effective at improving urinary parameters in men with CUR. Despite larger prostate volumes, HoLEP had a 99{\%} successful deobstruction rate, thus rendering patients catheter-free.",
keywords = "laser therapy, prostate, prostatic hyperplasia, transurethral prostatectomy, transurethral resection of prostate",
author = "Jaeger, {Christopher D.} and Mitchell, {Christopher R.} and Mynderse, {Lance A.} and Amy Krambeck",
year = "2015",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/bju.12674",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "115",
pages = "295--299",
journal = "BJU International",
issn = "1464-4096",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention

AU - Jaeger, Christopher D.

AU - Mitchell, Christopher R.

AU - Mynderse, Lance A.

AU - Krambeck, Amy

PY - 2015/2/1

Y1 - 2015/2/1

N2 - Objectives: To evaluate short-term outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention (CUR). Patients and Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP or PVP at our institution over a 3-year period. CUR was defined as a persistent post-void residual urine volume (PVR) of >300 mL or refractory urinary retention requiring catheterisation. Results: We identified 72 patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP and 31 who underwent PVP. Preoperative parameters including median catheterisation duration (3 vs 5 months, P = 0.71), American Urological Association Symptom Index score (AUASI; 18 vs 21, P = 0.24), and PVR (555 vs 473 mL, P = 0.096) were similar between the HoLEP and PVP groups. The HoLEP group had a larger prostate volume (88.5 vs 49 mL, P < 0.001) and higher PSA concentration (4.5 vs 2.4 ng/mL, P = 0.001). At median 6-month follow-up, 71 (99%) HoLEP patients and 23 (74%) PVP patients were catheter-free (P < 0.001). Of the voiding patients, postoperative AUASI (3 vs 4, P = 0.06), maximum urinary flow rate (23 vs 18 mL/s, P = 0.28) and PVR (56.5 vs 54 mL, P = 1.0) were improved in both groups. Conclusions: Both HoLEP and PVP are effective at improving urinary parameters in men with CUR. Despite larger prostate volumes, HoLEP had a 99% successful deobstruction rate, thus rendering patients catheter-free.

AB - Objectives: To evaluate short-term outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (PVP) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and chronic urinary retention (CUR). Patients and Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP or PVP at our institution over a 3-year period. CUR was defined as a persistent post-void residual urine volume (PVR) of >300 mL or refractory urinary retention requiring catheterisation. Results: We identified 72 patients with CUR who underwent HoLEP and 31 who underwent PVP. Preoperative parameters including median catheterisation duration (3 vs 5 months, P = 0.71), American Urological Association Symptom Index score (AUASI; 18 vs 21, P = 0.24), and PVR (555 vs 473 mL, P = 0.096) were similar between the HoLEP and PVP groups. The HoLEP group had a larger prostate volume (88.5 vs 49 mL, P < 0.001) and higher PSA concentration (4.5 vs 2.4 ng/mL, P = 0.001). At median 6-month follow-up, 71 (99%) HoLEP patients and 23 (74%) PVP patients were catheter-free (P < 0.001). Of the voiding patients, postoperative AUASI (3 vs 4, P = 0.06), maximum urinary flow rate (23 vs 18 mL/s, P = 0.28) and PVR (56.5 vs 54 mL, P = 1.0) were improved in both groups. Conclusions: Both HoLEP and PVP are effective at improving urinary parameters in men with CUR. Despite larger prostate volumes, HoLEP had a 99% successful deobstruction rate, thus rendering patients catheter-free.

KW - laser therapy

KW - prostate

KW - prostatic hyperplasia

KW - transurethral prostatectomy

KW - transurethral resection of prostate

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921484881&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921484881&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/bju.12674

DO - 10.1111/bju.12674

M3 - Article

C2 - 24552209

AN - SCOPUS:84921484881

VL - 115

SP - 295

EP - 299

JO - BJU International

JF - BJU International

SN - 1464-4096

IS - 2

ER -