Predictive factors of improvement for voiding symptoms after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate

Yamamichi, Fukashi; Shigemura, Katsumi; Kitagawa, Koichi; Fujisawa, Masato

doi:10.1111/iju.13825

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…17 In terms of postoperative efficacy parameters, both groups in the present study showed comparable results with no statistically significant difference, with a significant improvement in the preoperative values for both procedures. These results were comparable with the previous studies carried out by Neill et al, Shoma et al and Habib et al 3,12,13 The volume of the resected tissues is one of the main predictive factors of improvement for voiding symptoms, as mentioned by Yamamichi et al 18 There was no difference in the volume of resected tissues between both groups, as evaluated by TRUS, with a reduction rate of 76.6% in the HoLEP group compared with 76.9% in the BPEP group, with no statistically significant difference between both groups and a highly significant difference between the 12 months followup finding compared with the preoperative volume of both groups. These results were comparable with the study carried out by Habib et al 16 Regarding perioperative and delayed complications in the present study, there was no statistically significant difference between both groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…The volume of the resected tissues is one of the main predictive factors of improvement for voiding symptoms, as mentioned by Yamamichi et al 18 . There was no difference in the volume of resected tissues between both groups, as evaluated by TRUS, with a reduction rate of 76.6% in the HoLEP group compared with 76.9% in the BPEP group, with no statistically significant difference between both groups and a highly significant difference between the 12 months follow‐up finding compared with the preoperative volume of both groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate in management of benign prostatic hyperplasia: A randomized controlled trial

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the safety, efficacy and cost‐effectiveness of holmium enucleation of the prostate and bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate. Methods In our randomized controlled trial, 120 patients were allocated into two equal groups representing holmium enucleation of the prostate and bipolar enucleation of the prostate. Operative parameters were recorded according to operative, enucleation and resection time in addition to the intraoperative complications. Patients were followed up at 1, 3 and 12 months postoperative to assess the prostate size, post‐voiding residual urine, International Prostate Symptom Score, peak urine flow rate and quality of life, and compared with the preoperative parameters. Cost analysis was evaluated for both procedures. Results We evaluated 107 patients who finished our follow up and their data were analyzed. The prostate size was 135.2 ± 34.8 mL and 125 ± 26.9 mL for holmium enucleation of the prostate and bipolar enucleation of the prostate, respectively. Holmium enucleation of the prostate was associated with a shorter operative time of 83.43 ± 6.92 min compared with 94.7 ± 12.2 min in bipolar enucleation of the prostate groups. Holmium enucleation of the prostate was associated with an earlier catheter removal time and shorter hospital stay compared with bipolar enucleation of the prostate. Postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score, quality of life, post‐voiding residual urine, peak urine flow rate, prostate‐specific antigen and prostate volume reduction were comparable between both groups, and they both showed statistically significant improvement compared with their preoperative parameters. In the cost analysis, holmium enucleation of the prostate was more cost‐effective than bipolar enucleation of the prostate. Conclusion Both holmium enucleation of the prostate and bipolar enucleation of the prostate are safe and effective in the surgical management of large prostatic adenomas. Holmium enucleation of the prostate has a shorter operative time and hospital stay with earlier catheter removal time, and is more cost‐effective than bipolar enucleation of the prostate.

show abstract