Purpose: The study aimed to evaluate progression of GreenLight-XPS 180 W photoselective vaporization of the prostate (GL-XPS) with respect to effectiveness, efficacy, and safety over time at a tertiary referral high volume center. Methods: The retrospective study included 375 men who underwent GL-XPS for symptomatic benign prostate obstruction (BPO) between June 2010 and February 2015. Primary outcome measurements were operation time (OT; min) and effective laser time (LT; min of OT) analyzed with regard to prostatic volume (PV; mL) (group 1 <40 mL up to 4 >80 mL in 20 mL steps) and the year of surgery (2010–2015). Results: The median age was 72 years (range 64–79), the median PV was 58 mL (range 33–98) and the median PV increased from 42 mL in 2012 to 80 mL in 2015. The OT and LT clearly correlated with the PV, being doubled for glands of median 95 mL compared to median 30 mL while the applied laser energy per LT likewise steadily increased. Overall, both OT and LT could be significantly reduced each year by 37% (OT; p < 0.05) and 36% (LT; p < 0.05) within 5 years. The hospital stay (days) and catheterization time (days) remained constant, without any changes over time. The overall complication rate (Clavien-Dindo >2) ranged from 36 to 15% between 2010 and 2015. The pre (median 22 + 4) and postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score-Quality of Life (median 5 + 1) showed a sufficient reduction in symptomatic BPO. Conclusion: GL-XPS is a safe and effective surgical method for symptomatic BPO. Our single center experience showed a significant improvement of both OT and effective LT within 5 years whilst maintaining stable low complication rate and high patient satisfaction.

The aim of this paper was to compare the perioperative and postoperative results of photoselective vaporization of the prostate with the GreenLight-XPS 180 Watt System (PVP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). This retrospective study included 140 men who underwent PVP and 114 men who underwent TURP for symptomatic benign prostate enlargement (BPE) between June 2010 and February 2015. The primary outcome measures were the patient reported outcome, operative results, International Prostate Symptom Score-Quality of Life (IPSS-QoL), complication rates, catheterization time, and length of hospital stay. The median follow-up times were 27 months (range 14–44) for the PVP group and 36 months (range 25–47) for the TURP group. The patient characteristics were well balanced in both groups with a median age of 71 years (PVP group) vs. 70 years (TURP group) and a comparable prostate volume (median 50 mL in the PVP group vs. 45 mL in the TURP group). The IPSS-QoL was significantly higher in the PVP group than in the TURP group (median 22 + 4; range 16–27 + 3−5 vs. median 19 + 3; range 15−23 + 3−4; p = 0.02). Men undergoing PVP were more likely to be on anticoagulants (PVP group n = 23; 16% vs. TURP group n = 2; 2%, p < 0.001). The median operation time (OT; min) for both procedures was comparable with 68 min (PVP group; range 53–91) vs. 67 min (TURP group; range 46–85). The rate of severe intraoperative bleeding was significantly lower in the PVP group than in the TURP group (n = 7; 5% vs. n = 16; 14%; p = 0.01). The postoperative catheterization time and length of hospital stay was significantly lower in the PVP group (median 1–2 days; range 1–4) vs. the TURP group (median 2–4 days; range 2–5; both p < 0.001). Complication rates (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥III) based on the follow-up data showed no statistically significant difference between the PVP group and the TURP group (n = 6; 4% vs. n = 6; 5%; p = 0.28). The IPSS on follow-up showed an equivalent reduction in symptoms for both treatment modalities (IPSS-QoL of 5 + 1; range 2–11 + 0−2 for both). There were no differences concerning urge (PVP group n = 3; 2% vs. TURP group n = 3; 3%; p = 0.90) and men were similarly satisfied with the postoperative outcome (PVP group 92% vs. TURP group 87%; p = 0.43). The PVP group was associated with a shorter hospitalization time and showed a reduced risk of bleeding, despite patients remaining on anticoagulants, without increasing the overall operative time. There was no difference in the patient reported outcome for both procedures.