Day Case GreenLight Laser Photoselective Vaporisation of the Prostate (GL-PVP)

Background and ObjectiveIn recent years, GreenLight laser photoselective vaporisation of the prostate (GL-PVP) has emerged as the primary ablative surgical treatment option for symptomatic bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) secondary to benign prostatic enlargement (BPE). Unlike the reference procedure, monopolar-transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP), GL-PVP can be performed as a day case. As waiting list pressures continue to burden health boards across the UK, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, enhanced access to day case surgery to optimise patient flow is now of paramount importance. We evaluated the safety and feasibility of day case GL-PVP at our high-volume UK centre and identified predictors of a postoperative overnight stay. Material and MethodsWe performed a retrospective observational cohort study of all patients who underwent primary GL-PVP at a single institution between October 2016 and June 2021. All procedures were performed utilising the 180W GreenLight XPS™ laser therapy system. Various clinical, operative and functional data were collated, and outcomes were compared between patients who underwent day case surgery and those admitted overnight postoperatively. ResultsIn all, 538 patients underwent GL-PVP during the study period. Median patient age was 72 (interquartile range (IQR) 66–77), and median prostate volume was 62.5cc (IQR 45–90). Five hundred nineteen patients (96.5%) were discharged within 23 hours of admission, and 366 patients (68.0%) were managed as a true day case. Operative and functional outcomes were comparable between patients managed as a day case and those admitted overnight. There was higher patient-reported satisfaction and a lower rate of early hospital readmission in the day-case group. On univariate logistic regression analysis, patients aged ≥80 years (Odds Ratio 2.64 [95% Confidence Interval 1.65– 4.24], p = < 0.001), those with American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification score ≥3 (OR 1.92 [95% CI 1.33–2.78], p = < 0.001), those with prostate volume ≥80cc (OR 1.62 [95% CI 1.00–2.61], p = 0.05) and those in whom the operation time ≥60 minutes (OR 1.66 [95% CI 1.10–2.52], p = 0.02) were more likely to be admitted overnight following GL-PVP. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, age ≥80 (OR 2.64 [95% CI 1.47–4.73], p = 0.001) and ASA score ≥3 (OR 2.03 [95% CI 1.28–3.22], p = 0.003) remained predictive variables of an overnight stay. ConclusionFrom our observations of a large cohort of patients over a study period of almost five years, day case GL-PVP is a feasible concept and does not appear to compromise perioperative outcomes. With appropriate service redesign and optimisation of postoperative patient pathways, day case GL-PVP can be established in other centres and may have a role in alleviating waiting list pressures.

Proctored Step by Step Training Program for GreenLight Laser Anatomic Photovaporization of the Prostate: A Single Surgeon's Experience

Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of a proctored step-by-step training program for GreenLight laser anatomic photovaporization (aPVP) of the prostate.Methods: Data from patients undergoing aPVP between January 2019 and December 2020 operated by a single surgeon following a dedicated step-by-step proctored program were prospectively collected. The procedure was divided into five modular steps of increasing complexity. Preoperative patients' data as well as total operative time, energy delivered on the prostate and postoperative data, were recorded. Then, we assessed how the overall amount of energy delivered and the operative times varied during the training program. Surgical steps were analyzed by cumulative summation. Univariable and multivariable regression models were built to assess the predictors of the amount of energy delivered on the prostate.Results: Sixty consecutive patients were included in the analysis. Median prostate volume was 56.5 mL. The training program was succesfully completed with no intraoperative or meaningful post-operative complications. The energy delivered reached the plateau after the 40th case. At multivariable analysis, increasing surgeon experience was associated with lower amounts of energy delivered as well as lower operative times.Conclusions: A step-by-step aPVP training program can be safely performed by surgeons with prior endoscopic experience if mentored by a skilled proctor. Considering the energy delivered as an efficacy surrogate metrics (given its potential impact on persistent postoperative LUTS), 40 cases are needed to reach a plateau for aPVP proficiency. Further studies are needed to assess the safety of our step-by-step training modular program in other clinical contexts.