• Users Online: 1386
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

A comparative study of the efficacy of thulium fiber laser enucleation and transurethral resection for medium- to large-size prostate


 Department of Urology, Sai Urology Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Abhay Dinkar Mahajan,
Sai Urology Hospital, 1, Vishal Nagar, Gajanan Mandir Road, Aurangabad - 431 005, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/UROS.UROS_92_22

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the newer, thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) versus the transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for medium- to large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Materials and Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective study between May 2020 and June 2021. Among these, we included patients >50 years of age, with prostate size >80 cc, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) >19, and maximum urine flow rate (Qmax) <15 mL/s. All patients underwent either TURP or ThuFLEP. Preoperative parameters such as IPSS score, quality of life (QoL) score, Qmax, and residual urine were assessed. Results: Of the total of 101 patients, 29 underwent ThuFLEP and 72 TURP. The mean prostate volume was significantly higher in the ThuFLEP group compared to the TURP (P = 0.01). The mean operative time was longer for ThuFLEP compared to TURP (P < 0.0001). No significant difference was noted in the postoperative hematuria (P = 0.29) and mean postoperative hemoglobin (P = 0.37). The QoL scores were significantly improved with ThuFLEP than TURP (P = 0.0006). Compared to a day after catheter removal, the proportion of patients with stress, urge, and total incontinence was significantly reduced at the end of 1 month in the ThuFLEP group (P < 0.00001); however, it was significantly greater than with TURP (P < 0.05). At 3 months, no significant difference was found between IPSS (P = 0.37) and Qmax (P = 0.98) scores between the groups; however, the decrease from baseline was significant for IPSS (P < 0.0001). The Clavien–Dindo Grade I and II complications were 31% and 13.8%, respectively, for ThuFLEP and 8.3% and 1.4% for TURP. There was no significant difference of patients with late complications. Conclusion: ThuFLEP demonstrated efficacy similar to TURP in medium- to larger-size BPH in terms of IPSS and Qmax but had significant improvement in QoL scores. The overall complications with ThuFLEP were higher as compared to TURP.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Mahajan AD
    -  Mahajan SA
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed105    
    PDF Downloaded4    

Recommend this journal