In 2013, Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) May Be the New ‘Gold Standard’

In this review article, we assess why holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) has become an important treatment modality for benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH). Meta-analysis comparing HoLEP with both open prostatectomy (OP) and transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) shows TURP to be as effective with less morbidity. More recently, HoLEP has long-term durability data confirming a very low reoperation rate. This article investigates how previous hurdles to the widespread uptake of HoLEP have been overcome. Recent literature shows that the learning curve is actually similar to many other current urological procedures, and that the efficiency of HoLEP is equal to that of other surgical procedures. HoLEP is also beneficial in the growing population of men on anticoagulation who require treatment for BPH. Finally, HoLEP is the only laser treatment for BPH with level 1 evidence and endorsement in both the American Urological Association (AUA) and European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines.     

Comparison of standard transurethral resection, transurethral vapour resection and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia of >40 g

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of two alternatives for surgically treating symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), i.e. transurethral vapour resection of the prostate (TUVRP) and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HOLEP), with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), the standard surgical therapy, as treating large prostates is associated with greater morbidity, and to date there is no simultaneous comparison of these three methods. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively randomized 150 patients (50 in each group) with BPH and glands of >40 g to undergo either TURP, TUVRP or HOLEP. The evaluation before treatment included urine culture, serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) level estimation, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), peak urinary flow rate (Q(max)), and transabdominal ultrasonography to estimate prostate size and postvoid urine residue (PVR). The operative duration, blood loss, resected tissue weight, change in levels of haemoglobin and serum sodium, nursing contact time, duration of catheterization, and complications were noted. After surgery patients were reassessed for the IPSS, Q(max) and PVR at 6 months and 1 year. RESULTS: The patients in all three groups had comparable characteristics before surgery. The mean operating duration and intraoperative irrigant used for TUVRP was less than for HOLEP or TURP, and blood loss with HOLEP and TUVRP was less than with TURP (all P < 0.001). Postoperative irrigation, nursing contact time, and catheter duration were significantly less for HOLEP than TURP or TUVRP, and for TUVRP than TURP. At follow-up, patients in all groups had a significant improvement from baseline in IPSS, Q(max,) and PVR, but the differences between the groups were not significant at 6 months or 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: HOLEP and TUVRP are both acceptable alternatives to TURP for treating large prostate glands, with less perioperative morbidity and comparable efficacy at 6 months and 1 year.     

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in patients with continuous oral anticoagulation: first reported cases in Japan

Oral anticoagulation (OA) has been considered as a strict contraindication to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). In recent years, some studies have shown that holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) has less blood loss compared to TURP. Thus we have performed HoLEP in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) under continuous OA from September 2009, and herein we report our first nine cases. Patients received HoLEP by a single surgeon at our institution. HoLEP was performed successfully in all patients. The mean times to complete enucleation and morcellation were 48.2 and 5.1 minutes, respectively. The mean tissue weight of enucleation was 37 grams. The mean hemoglobin and sodium loss after HoLEP were 1.7 g/dl and 1.3 mEq/L, respectively, and the catheterization time was 1.6 days. Blood transfusion, clot retention or transurethral resection syndrome were not observed in any cases. HoLEP has excellent hemostatic properties, and is a safe and effective procedure for patients with symptomatic BPH under the condition of continuous OA.     

经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术的技术要点和尿道黏膜保留的策略(附光盘)

经过20多年的发展,经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)目前已成为一种主要的内镜下前列腺剜除方法,并有取代经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)成为良性前列腺增生症(BPH)外科治疗新的金标准之趋势。但是学习曲线太长仍然是限制其推广的主要原因。本文对HoLEP的关键技术进行总结并介绍一种完整保留前列腺尖部尿道黏膜的手术策略,希望能减少术后暂时性压力性尿失禁的发生率,并尽量缩短学习曲线。     

钬激光前列腺剜除术与电切术安全性及疗效比较

目的 比较并探讨钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)和传统经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)的安全性及疗效,旨在为良性前列腺增生症的临床治疗提供理论依据.方法 回顾性分析哈尔滨医科大学附属第四医院2015年1月-2016年1月收治的349例良性前列腺增生症患者的病例资料,并将其随机分成两组.其中172例患者选择行钬激光前列腺剜除术,另外177例患者选择行传统经尿道前列腺电切术.比较两组患者术中出血量、手术时间、术后导尿管留置时间、术后住院天数以及术后并发症(尿失禁、膀胱痉挛、出血)的发病率.随访3个月,重新评估IPSS、QOL、Qmax指标并比较疗效.结果 与传统经尿道前列腺电切术组相比,钬激光前列腺剜除术组患者的手术时间明显缩短、术中出血量及术后住院天数显著降低(P＜0.05),术后导尿管留置时间[钬激光前列腺剜除术组:(2.4±0.5)d;传统经尿道前列腺电切术组:(5.7±0.6)d,P＜0.05].明显减少,术中切除前列腺重量明显增加,术后并发症的发病率[钬激光前列腺剜除术组:5/172(2.9％);传统经尿道前列腺电切术组:19/177(10.7％),P＜0.01]显著下降.3个月后,两组术后PVR、IPSS、QOL以及Qmax较术前相比明显改善(P＜0.01),组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 钬激光前列腺剜除术与传统经尿道前列腺电切术相比疗效相当,但安全性更高.钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗临床前列腺增生症具有重要意义.     

Transurethral holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral electrocautery resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective trial in 200 patients

PURPOSE: Transurethral electrocautery resection (TURP) is generally regarded as the gold standard surgical treatment for bladder outflow obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia despite its rather high morbidity. The high powered holmium:YAG laser can be used endoscopically to enucleate obstructing prostatic tissue in a relatively bloodless manner. The technique of transurethral holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) was compared to standard TURP for the surgical management of prostate adenomas in a randomized, prospective clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 200 urodynamically obstructed patients with a prostate of less than 100 gm on transrectal ultrasound were randomized to HoLEP or TURP. All patients were assessed preoperatively, and 1, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Patient baseline characteristics, perioperative data and postoperative outcome were compared. All complications were noted. RESULTS: HoLEP was significantly superior to TURP in terms of catheter time, hospital stay and hemoglobin loss but operative time was longer. HoLEP and TURP resulted in a significant improvement in American Urological Association symptom scores, peak urinary flow rates and post-void residual urine volumes with symptoms scores and residual volume significantly better in the holmium group. Effects on continence and potency were similar in the 2 groups but adverse events were less frequent in the holmium group. CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP and TURP are highly effective procedures for removing obstructing prostatic adenomas. HoLEP resulted in significantly better micturition parameters and less perioperative morbidity.     

经尿道前列腺切除术对性功能影响的Meta分析

目的:探讨经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)、前列腺电汽化术(TUEVP)和钬激光前列腺剜除术(Ho-LEP)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)对男性性功能的影响。方法:搜集比较TURP、TUEVP及HoLEP对性功能影响的随机对照研究(RCT),以Meta分析法系统比较不同术式治疗BPH对性功能的影响。结果:9个RCT研究1 050例患者纳入分析,研究基线具有可比性。TURP与TUEVP相比,对勃起功能影响较小(P=0.04),对射精功能的影响无显著差异。HoLEP和TURP在术后12个月和24个月对勃起和射精功能的影响均无显著差异。结论:TUEVP比TURP更易引起勃起功能障碍,但对射精功能的影响无明显差别;HoLEP与TURP对勃起和射精功能的影响无明显差别。     

Laser treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia

To evaluate the role of lasers that allow acute removal of obstructing tissue in the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A MEDLINE search over the last 6 years focused on randomized trials, large case series and review articles. A total of more than 4,000 patients were analyzed with respect to the morbidity and outcome, and the advantages and disadvantages of the various lasers. Laser treatment of BPH has evolved from coagulation to enucleation. Blood loss is significantly reduced as compared to transurethral resection and open prostatectomy. Ablative/vaporizing techniques have recently become popular again with the marketing of new high-powered 80 W potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) and 100 W holmium lasers. Vaporization immediately removes obstructing tissue, but tissue specimen cannot be obtained. KTP short-term results are promising, but long-term results and randomized trials are lacking. Postoperative volume reduction is less than with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), and the KTP laser can be used for BPH treatment only. HoLEP allows whole lobes of the prostate to be removed. Prostates of all sizes can be operated on. It is at least as safe and effective as TURP and open prostatectomy, with significantly lower morbidity, as shown by several well-designed randomized clinical trials. It provides specimen for histological evaluation. In addition, the holmium laser can be used for the endourological treatment of stones, strictures and tumors. HoLEP appears to be a size-independent new “gold standard” in the surgical treatment of BPH.     

前列腺钬激光整块剜除术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗前列腺增生的比较

目的对比前列腺钬激光整块剜除术（HoLEP）与经尿道前列腺电切术（TURP）在治疗前列腺增生（BPH）中的疗效。 方法行前瞻性研究,将医院2018年6月至2021年6月收治的76例BPH患者纳为研究对象,随机数字表法将其均分为HoLEP组及TURP组,比较两组围术期相关指标及术后恢复指标,探究两种术式在治疗BPH中的疗效。 结果HoLEP组手术时间较TURP组延长,血红蛋白下降值较TURP组低,前列腺切除重量较TURP组增加,差异均具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。HoLEP组手术前后电解质Na⁺及K⁺水平比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）,TURP组术后Na⁺及K⁺水平较其术前均下降,且其术后Na⁺及K⁺水平均低于HoLEP组术后水平,差异均具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。HoLEP组术后膀胱冲洗时间、留置导尿管时间及术后住院时间均短于TURP组,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。HoLEP组术后并发症发生率低于TURP组,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。术后6个月,两组国际前列腺症状评分（IPSS）、生活质量评分（QOL）、最大尿流率（Q_max）、残余尿以及最大尿流率时逼尿肌压力（Pdet/Q_max）水平比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论HoLEP及TURP均能有效切除增生前列腺组织,改善BPH患者下尿路症状,实现治疗目的,但与TURP相比,HoLEP术后并发症更少,患者术后恢复更快。     

经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术与前列腺电切术近期疗效的对比分析

目的比较前列腺钬激光剜除术(holmium laser enucleation of the prostate,HoLEP)和前列腺电切术(transurethral resection of the prostate,TURP)治疗良性前列腺增生(benign prostatic hyplasia,BPH)的疗效及安全性。方法将2012年6月至2013年7月90例行腔内手术治疗的BPH患者随机分为2组,分别行前列腺钬激光剜除术(HoLEP)和经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)。监测、记录2组患者围手术期和术后1、3、6个月复查指标,比较最大尿流率(maximum flow rate,Qmax)、国际前列腺症状评分(international prostate symptom score,IPSS)、生活质量评分(quality of life score,QOL)等变化并进行统计学分析,比较两种术式近期临床疗效。结果术前两组患者一般情况和国际前列腺症状评分、生活质量评分、最大尿流率、残余尿量测量以及前列腺重量比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);HoLEP组较TURP组术中出血量、手术时间、低钠血症的发生率、膀胱冲洗时间、留管时间都较低(P0.01);术后1个月、3个月及6个月2组IPSS、QOL和Qmax均比术前有明显改善(P0.01);但2组间比较并无显著统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 HoLEP术与TURP术相比,近期手术效果相似,且手术安全性更好,可视为治疗BPH的较好新方法。     

经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗BPH的Meta分析

目的:用Meta分析的方法评价经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)和经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)/开放手术(OP)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)所致膀胱出口梗阻(BOO)的疗效和安全性. 方法:计算机检索Medline、Cochrane临床对照试验中心数据库、Embase、万方数据库和中国生物医学文献数据库,手工检索...     

Perioperative management of transurethral surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A nationwide survey in Japan

Objectives: Various types of minimally invasive surgical treatments, including transurethral resection of prostate (TURP), are being carried out in Japan for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The aim of the present study was to elucidate the current status of perioperative care for these treatments by carrying out a nationwide survey. Methods: Assisted by the Japanese Endourology and ESWL Association, perioperative data from 157 institutions participating in this survey were collected and analyzed. Results: This survey included 3918 patients undergoing TURP, 242 TUR in saline (TURis), 638 holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), 90 holmium laser ablation (HoLAP) and 241 photoselective vaporization (PVP). Mean operative time was shorter in TURP (71 min) and longer in HoLEP (127). Although no transfusions were required in cases undergoing HoLAP or PVP, blood was frequently transfused in those undergoing TURis (25.6%), TURP (10.2%) and HoLEP (7.8%), and the difference was significant. During the hospital stay, the incidence of TUR‐syndrome, postoperative bleeding requiring bladder irrigation, acute urinary retention/difficulty on micturition and pad use at discharge was highest in TURP (2.3%), TURis (7.9%), HoLAP (16.7%) and HoLEP (15.1%), respectively. Two patients undergoing TURP died (0.05%). The shortest mean postoperative hospital stay was for PVP (1.6 days, even if the readmission rate within 90 days was the highest in this same group; 6.2%). Perioperative care during hospital stay varied among the five types of procedures. Conclusions: This survey provides useful documentation on the current status of minimally invasive treatments for BPH in Japan. Complication rates for TURP are not significantly higher as compared with other procedures. Thus, TURP can still be considered as the gold standard for BPH treatment.     

Laser prostatic surgery: An update

This review presents an overview of the current state of the art of laser prostatic surgery. Several types of lasers have been used in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) over the past 15 years. Vaporization techniques have recently gained popularity and have been widely accepted by many urologists. Short-term results show that vaporization of a prostatic adenoma with higher-power potassium titanyl phosphate and holmium lasers is safe and effective in the treatment of symptomatic BPH. However, well designed randomized comparative trials with long-term follow-up are still needed. Holmium laser is a multi-purpose surgical tool and has multiple applications in urology. In the treatment of symptomatic BPH, holmium laser can be used in ablation, resection and enucleation of the prostate. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is the most investigated laser procedure used in the treatment of symptomatic BPH. Several randomized controlled trails confirmed the safety, efficacy, and durability of HoLEP regardless of the prostate size.     

Thick vs thin loop transurethral resection of the prostate: a double-blind prospective trial of early morbidity

OBJECTIVE: To compare blood loss, irrigation requirements and hospital stay between standard transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and resection incorporating vaporization, i.e. transurethral vaporization resection (TUVRP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy patients were prospectively randomized in a blinded fashion between TURP with a standard resection loop (thin loop) or resection with a roller cutting electrode (thick loop). The outcome was assessed as the change in haemoglobin at 30 min and 24 h after the resection finished. Secondary outcome measures were irrigation requirements, length of catheterization, hospital stay, changes in serum sodium, and complications. The nursing staff and surgical registrar managing the patients after surgery were unaware of the resection technique used. RESULTS: Data were available for 65 patients (36 thin loop and 29 thick loop resections). The mean decrease in haemoglobin after TURP was 14.8 g/L at 30 min and 11.8 g/L at 24 h; for TUVRP the corresponding values were 14.6 and 14.2 g/L (P = 0.69). In addition, there was no difference in irrigation requirements, changes in serum sodium, length of catheterization, hospital stay or bleeding complications. CONCLUSION: The use of a thick loop at higher cutting current settings during TUVRP offers no advantage over standard thin-loop TURP.     

三种经尿道前列腺切除术的比较研究

目的 探讨三种经尿道前列腺切除术的优缺点。方法 回顾性分析经尿道前列腺电切术(TtmP)400例、经尿道前列腺汽化术(TUVP)20例、经尿道前列腺汽化电切术(TVRP)400例的临床资料。结果 3种手术方法的适应证、禁忌证基本相同。并发症略有差异：术后出血TURP12例(3％)，TUVP2例(10％)，TUVRP10例(2．5％)；冲洗液外渗TURP8例(2．0％)，TUVP1例(5％)，TUVRP6例(1．5％)；迟发性出血TURP10例(2．5％)，TUVP2例(10％)，TUVRP6例(1．5％)；尿道狭窄TURP6例(1．5％)，TUVP 1例(5％)，TUVRP2例(0．5％)。结论 TURP和TUVRP的适应证宽，并发症少，安全性高，疗效确切；比TUVP更具临床实用价值。     

钬激光前列腺剜除术与前列腺汽化电切术治疗良性前列腺增生的疗效比较

目的 比较经尿道前列腺汽化电切术与经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗前列腺增生症 的疗效。 方法 将160例前列腺增生症( benign prostatic hyperplasia,BPH)患者随机分为两组,每组80例,分别用 TUVP 及HoLEP 治疗 。比较两种术式 的手术时间、手术出血量、 膀胱冲洗时间 、住院时间、并发症及近期疗效等指标 。结果 两组患者术后国际前列腺症状评分 （IPSS）、生活质量评分（ QOL）、最大尿流率和残余尿量均较术前明显改善,但两组上述指标间比较差异无显著性差异 。HoLEP组术中出血量、术后膀胱冲洗时间、住院时间明显短于TUVP组;并发症发 生率低于TUVP组。 结论 TUVP 及HoLEP 治疗前列腺增生症均有效;HoLEP的手术安全性优于TUVP。     

HoLEP与TURP治疗BPH的并发症比较

目的:比较经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)与经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)在治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)中的并发症差异。方法:将112例BPH患者分为两组,分别采用HoLEP(A组)或TURP(B组)治疗,比较两组患者术后早期并发症及随访1年后的并发症差异。结果:A组术后早期并发症发生率均低于B组,其中术后尿路刺激症状、拔管后血尿差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。随访1年后,A组远期并发症低于B组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:HoLEP治疗BPH的术后早期并发症及远期并发症比TURP更低,疗效更好。     

A randomised trial comparing holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection in the treatment of prostates larger than 40 grams: results at 2 years

OBJECTIVE: To compare holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for treatment of men with bladder outflow obstruction (BOO) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia with a minimum of 24-month follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-one patients were randomised to either HoLEP or TURP. All patients had BOO proven on urodynamic studies pre-operatively (prostate size 40-200 g). One patient died before treatment, which left 30 patients in each group. Perioperative data, as well as symptom scores, Quality of Life (QoL) scores, and maximum urinary flow rates (Qmax) were obtained at one, three, six,12, and 24 months. Post-void residual volumes, transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) volumes, and pressure flow studies were obtained six months post-operatively. Continence and potency data were also recorded. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two surgical groups pre-operatively. Mean pre-operative TRUS volume was 77.8+/-5.6 g (42-152) in the HoLEP group and 70.0+/-5.0 g (46-156) in the TURP group. Patients in the HoLEP group had shorter catheter times and hospital stays. More prostate tissue was retrieved in the HoLEP group. At six months, HoLEP was urodynamically superior to TURP in relieving BOO. At 24 months, there was no significant difference between the two surgical groups with respect to American Urology Association scores, QoL scores, or Qmax values; however, two patients in the TURP group required re-operation. CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP has less perioperative morbidity and produces superior urodynamic outcomes than TURP, when treating prostates >40 g. At 24 months of follow-up, HoLEP is equivalent to TURP.     

SPP、TURP、HoLEP三种前列腺切除术对性功能的影响

目的比较钬激光前列腺切除术（HoLEP）、经尿道前列腺电切术（TURP）和耻骨上前列腺切除术（SPP）三种手术方式对BPH患者性功能的影响。方法随访92例前列腺切除手术的BPH患者，评价：IPSS、性生活情况、勃起功能（阴茎勃起硬度、IIEF-5）和射精情况（射精有无、精液量、有无逆行射精、有无射精痛）。结果（1）三组术后3月IPSS评分均有显著下降（P〈0．01）；（2）三组术后IIEF-5均有不同程度降低，SPP组与术前比较，差异有显著统计学意义（P〈0．01）。校正可能影响IIEF-5的因素后，三组手术IIEF．5评分改变无统计学差异；（3）HoLEP组、TURP组、SPP组勃起功能下降的发生率分别为：38．1％、28．6％、31．0％，HoLEP、SPP组术后勃起硬度下降明显；（4）HoLEP组和SPP组术后逆行射精发生率较术前有显著差异；（5）三种手术对性欲以及射精量的影响均较小；（6）勃起硬度的降低以及逆行射精的发生三种手术间无明显差异。结论HoLEP术后可导致性功能下降，主要表现在勃起功能降低和逆行射精。HoLEP术对性功能的影响与TURP和SPP相似。     

两种经尿道前列腺切除术的疗效比较

目的比较经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术和经尿道前列腺电切术治疗良性前列腺增生症的效果。方法前列腺增生症患者123例随机分为两组（剜除术组60例、电切术组63例）,分别行HoLEP和TuRP,监测、记录两组患者术前、术中及术后的相关临床指标,进行分析、对比。结果术前两组一般情况比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。剜除术组手术时间、术中冲洗液量较电切术组多,但术中出血量、术后出血量、膀胱冲洗时间、尿管留置时间均小于电切术组。术后随访1～6个月,两组IPSS、Qmax较术前均明显改善（P〈0．01）;剜除术组发生尿道狭窄3例,尿失禁1例,无阳痿发生;电切术组发生尿道狭窄5例、尿失禁2例、阳痿1例,两组间手术并发症发生率差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论剜除术治疗前列腺增生症,效果可靠,与电切术相比,具有出血少,术后恢复快等优点,值得进一步推广应用。