scholarly journals Towards optimizing prostate tissue retrieval following holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP): Assessment of two morcellators and review of literature

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (9-10) ◽  
pp. 618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed M. Elshal ◽  
Ramy Mekkawy ◽  
Mahmoud Laymon ◽  
Ahmed El-Assmy ◽  
Ahmed R. El-Nahas
Keyword(s):  
Perioperative Complications ◽  
Mucosal Injury ◽  
Prostate Tissue ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Retrieval Rate ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Laser Enucleation ◽  
Prostate Adenoma ◽  
Holmium Laser Enucleation

Introduction: We assess different approaches to retrieve the enucleated adenoma after transurethral enucleation of the prostate, particularly using the holmium laser.Methods: A retrospective review through our prospectively maintained database was performed looking for safety and efficacy of two morcellators. The enucleation phase of the holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) was classically performed followed by retrieval of the intravesical adenoma using either the Piranha (Wolf Inc., Knittlingen, Germany) or VersaCut (Lumenis) morcellator. A PubMed-MEDLINE search was conducted for all transurethral enucleation procedures and relevant data regarding methods of prostate tissue retrieval were extracted.Results: Strictly limiting the study to 3 reusable blades with each morcellator, we performed 67 and 55 consecutive procedures with Piranha and VersaCut, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two morcellators regarding perioperative complications, apart from 5 bladder mucosal injuries with the VersaCut (9%). Furthermore, there were similar retrieved tissue weight, mechanical problems-rate, catheter-time and hospital-stay in both morcellators. However, the Piranha morcellator needed significantly less morcellation-time, needed to use cold loop to remove non-morcellated pieces and to score the adenoma by laser for better bite of the adenoma, and had a higher median morcellation-rate 6.2 (rate: 2.8–12) g/min. Despite little reporting on morcellation, we had data on the tissue retrieval rate (2.6 to 6.5 g/min with Piranha and 1.9 to 11 g/min with VersaCut. Furthermore, bladder mucosal injury was reported in 1.4% and 0.7 to 5.7% with Piranha and VersaCut, respectively; bladder perforation with VersaCut was experienced in about 0.1 to 1.5% of patients. Our study is limited by its non-randomization.Conclusion: The Piranha morcellator was the most efficient and safe way to retrieve tissue after a transurethral enucleation of a prostate adenoma.

scholarly journals Effect of preoperative urethral dilatation on preventing urethral stricture after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: A randomized controlled study

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong Kwan Park ◽  
Ji Yong Kim ◽  
Jae Hyung You ◽  
Bo Ram Choi ◽  
Sung Chul Kam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urethral Stricture ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Urethral Dilatation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Laser Enucleation ◽  
Group B ◽  
Transurethral Prostate Surgery ◽  
Holmium Laser Enucleation

Introduction: We aimed to evaluate the effect of preoperative urethral dilatation during holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) on the prevention of urethral stricture. Methods: A total of 72 patients without urethral stricture underwent HoLEP for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Recruited patients were randomly divided into two groups (groups A and B). Patients in group A (36 patients, experimental group) received preoperative urethral dilatation and patients in group B (36 patients, control group) did not. Each patient was evaluated at four weeks, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks after surgery. The effectiveness of preoperative urethral dilatation was evaluated based on the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), peak urine flow rate (Qmax), voided volume, and post-void residual (PVR) volume. To diagnose urethral stricture, Qmax <10 mL/s, as assessed using uroflowmetry and findings of visualization through retrograde urethrography and urethroscopy, were used. Results: Among 72 initial participants, 33 patients in group A and 31 patients in group B completed the experiment. Preoperative characteristics were well-balanced between groups. At each postoperative visit, there was no significant difference in voiding symptoms between groups. Two patients (6.06%) in group A and five patients (15.15%) in group B showed a Qmax <10 mL/s on uroflowmetry (p=0.013). On urethroscopy, no patient in group A (0%) and two patients in group B (6.45%) (p=0.021) showed urethral stricture after HoLEP. Conclusions: Preoperative urethral dilatation during HoLEP decreased the incidence of urethral stricture. This procedure could be useful to reduce the risk of urethral stricture after transurethral prostate surgery. One limitation of the current study is the single-centre design. Also, we sought to determine the efficacy of preoperative urethral dilatation for the prevention of urethral stricture after transurethral prostate surgery within a short time period, which could be another limitation of the study. Despite these limitations, to the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first reported prospective, randomized trial analyzing the safety and efficacy of preoperative urethral dilatation for the prevention of urethral stricture after transurethral prostate surgery.

scholarly journals DrillCutTM vs. VersaCutTM prostate tissue morcellation devices after holmium laser enucleation: A prospective, randomized controlled trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Ibrahim ◽  
Mostafa M. Elhilali ◽  
Mohammed A. Elkoushy ◽  
Sero Andonian ◽  
Serge Carrier
Keyword(s):  
Small Sample Size ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Laser Enucleation ◽  
Holmium Laser Enucleation

Introduction: We aimed to compare efficacy, safety, and cost of disposables of the DrillCutTM morcellator with the VersaCutTM morcellator after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP).Methods: After obtaining ethical approval, consecutive patients undergoing HoLEP for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to have their enucleated prostates morcellated by either Karl Storz® DrillCutTM or Lumenis® VersaCutTM morcellators. All procedures were performed by two experienced urologists. Patients’ demographics and perioperative data were recorded. Both morcellators were compared for their safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness.Results: Eighty-two patients were included in the study (41 per each arm). Both groups were comparable in terms of age, preoperative prostate size (114 vs. 112 mL; p>0.05), enucleation time (95.3 vs. 91.7 minutes; p>0.05), and morcellation time (22.6 vs. 17.3 minutes; p>0.05). The DrillCutTM was associated with significantly lower morcellation rate when compared with the VersaCutTM(3.6 vs. 4.9 g/min; p= 0.03). In terms of safety, there was no significant difference between both morcellators in complication rates (2.4% vs. 7.3 %; p=0.1). However, there was one case of bladder perforation requiring exploration with the VersaCutTM. The DrillCutTM was associated with significantly higher cost of disposables when compared with the VersaCutTM ($247.5 vs. $160.9; p<0.01).Conclusions: Despite the small sample size, the DrillCutTM was associated with lower morcellation rate when compared with the VersaCutTM. However, this difference may not be clinically significant. Although both morcellators were comparable in their safety, the DrillCutTM was associated with higher cost of disposables when compared with the VersaCutTM.

Perioperative Outcomes of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Angelo Porreca ◽  
Michele Colicchia ◽  
Alessandro Tafuri ◽  
Daniele D’Agostino ◽  
Gian Maria Busetto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Surgical Complications ◽  
Perioperative Complications ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Safe Procedure ◽  
Laser Enucleation ◽  
Holmium Laser Enucleation

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> The aim of the study was to systematically review the literature and describe perioperative complications of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), including the Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> All English language publications on HoLEP were evaluated. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to evaluate PubMed<sup>®</sup>, Scopus<sup>®</sup>, and Web of Science™ databases from January 1, 1998, to June 1, 2020. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Fifty-seven studies were included, for a total of 10,371 procedures. We distinguished between intra-, peri-, and postoperative complications. Overall, the rate of complications is 0–7%. Intraoperative complications include incomplete morcellation (2.3%), capsular perforation (2.2%), bladder (2.4%), and ureteric orifice (0.4%) injuries. Perioperative complications include postoperative urinary retention (0.2%), hematuria and clot retention (2.6%), and cystoscopy for clot evacuation (0.7%). Postoperative complications include dysuria (7.5%), stress (4.0%), urge (1.8%), transient (7%) and permanent (1.3%) urinary incontinence, urethral stricture (2%) and bladder neck contracture (1%). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> HoLEP is a safe procedure, with a satisfactory low complication rate. The most common reported perioperative complications are not severe (Clavien-Dindo classification grades 1–2). Further randomized studies are certainly warranted to fully determine the predictor of surgical complications in order to prevent them and improve this technique.

scholarly journals Two-year follow-up after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective randomized study

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mamdouh M. El-Hawy ◽  
Amr Eldakhakhny ◽  
Ahmed AbdEllatif ◽  
Emad A. Salem ◽  
Ahmed Ragab ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Transurethral Resection ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Preoperative Assessment ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Prospective Randomized Study ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Laser Enucleation ◽  
Holmium Laser Enucleation

Abstract Background Different treatment options are available for the management of BPH. Our study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of a holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and a bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (Bipolar-TURP) after 2 years. Methods Our prospective randomized study included 114 patients: 55 patients underwent HoLEP procedure and 59 patients underwent bipolar TURP procedure. All patients underwent a complete preoperative assessment and a physical examination. The postoperative follow-up data included Q max and IPSS recordings at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months and PVR urinary volume recordings at 6 and 12 months. Any postoperative complications were also recorded. Results There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding IPSS and Q max scores at one and 24 months postoperative. Also, there were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding postoperative PVR at 6 and 12 months. One patient in the HoLEP group developed total incontinence after surgery. Conclusion Our study did not show a significant difference between HoLEP and bipolar TURP regarding postoperative Q max and IPSS scores at 24 months of follow-up.

scholarly journals Safety and efficacy of Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in patients with previous transperineal biopsy (TPB): outcomes from a dual-centre case-control study

BMC Urology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Bell ◽  
Sacha L. Moore ◽  
Amarit Gill ◽  
Obinna Obi-Njoku ◽  
Stephen F. Hughes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Operative Outcomes ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Laser Enucleation ◽  
Baseline Characteristics ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Transperineal Biopsy ◽  
Holmium Laser Enucleation ◽  
Control Study ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Background We investigated the surgical feasibility, safety and effectiveness of 50 W (low power) Holmium Laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in patients who have undergone previous template biopsy of the prostate (TPB). Methods Data encompassing pre-operative baseline characteristics, intra-operative measures and post-operative outcomes was collected for 109 patients undergoing HoLEP across two UK centres. Patients were stratified into two groups; group 1 (n = 24) had undergone previous TPB were compared with ‘controls’ (no previous TPB) in group 2 (n = 85). The primary outcome was successful HoLEP. Results There were no statistically significant differences in either key baseline characteristics or mass of prostate enucleated between groups 1 and 2. There was no statistically significant difference in enucleation or morcellation times parameters between the two groups other than enucleation efficiency in favour of group 1 (p = 0.024). Functional outcomes improved, without any statistically significant difference, in both groups. Conclusions In patients with a previous TPB, HoLEP is surgically feasible, safe and effective. TPB should not be considered a contraindication to HoLEP. Our work provides a strong foundation for further research in this area.

scholarly journals Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate With Virtual Basket Mode: Faster and Better Control on Bleeding

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giorgio Bozzini ◽  
Matteo Maltagliati ◽  
Umberto Besana ◽  
Lorenzo Berti ◽  
Alberto Calori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Safe Procedure ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Laser Enucleation ◽  
Holmium Laser Enucleation ◽  
Irrigation Volume

Abstract BACKGROUND: To compare clinical intra and early postoperative outcomes between conventional Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate with Virtual Basket tool (VB-HoLEP) to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).METHODS: This prospective randomized study enrolled consecutive patients with BPH to HoLEP (n = 100) or VB-HoLEP (n =100). We evaluated all patients preoperatively with particular attention to catheterization time, operative time, blood loss, irrigation volume and hospital stay. We evaluated also the patients at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery with the use of maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS).RESULTS: We didn’t see significant difference in preoperative parameters between patients in each study arm. Compared with HoLEP, VB-HoLEP resulted in less hemoglobin decrease (2.54 vs 1.12 g/dL, P = .003) and had a more rapid operative time (57.33±29.71 vs 42.99±18.51 minutes, P = 0.04). HoLEP and VB-HoLEP had same catheterization time (2.2 vs 1.9 days, P = 0.45), irrigation volume (33.3 vs 31.7 L, P = 0.69), and hospital stay (2.8 vs 2.7 days, P = 0.21). During the follow-up of subsequent 12 months, we didn’t demonstrate a significant difference in IPSS, Qmax, PVR, and QOLS.CONCLUSION: HoLEP and VB-HoLEP both are efficient a safe procedure for relieving lower urinary tract symptoms. VB-HoLEP was statistically superior to HoLEP in blood loss and to allow a faster procedure. However, procedures did not differ significantly in catheterization time, hospital stay, operation time and irrigation volume. No differences were demonstrated in QOLF, IPSS, Qmax and PVR through the post-surgery 12 months of follow-up.TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN72879639; date of registration: June 25th, 2015. Retrospectively registred.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document