A Randomised Trial Comparing Holmium Laser Enucleation Versus Transurethral Resection in the Treatment of Prostates Larger Than 40 Grams: Results at 2 Years

@article{citeulike:1535977, abstract = {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.}, author = {Wilson, Liam C. and Gilling, Peter J. and Williams, Andrew and Kennett, Katie M. and Frampton, Chris M. and Westenberg, Andre M. and Fraundorfer, Mark R. }, booktitle = {European Urology goes Platinum}, citeulike-article-id = {1535977}, comment = {the rate of resection in TURP group was mentioned about 24/70}, doi = {10.1016/j.eururo.2006.04.002}, journal = {European Urology}, keywords = {compare, fulltext, holep, prosective, turp}, month = {September}, number = {3}, pages = {569--573}, posted-at = {2007-08-05 07:16:08}, priority = {2}, title = {A Randomised Trial Comparing Holmium Laser Enucleation Versus Transurethral Resection in the Treatment of Prostates Larger Than 40 Grams: Results at 2 Years}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.04.002}, volume = {50}, year = {2006} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:1535977 L3 - citeulike-article-id:1535977 TI - A Randomised Trial Comparing Holmium Laser Enucleation Versus Transurethral Resection in the Treatment of Prostates Larger Than 40 Grams: Results at 2 Years T2 - European Urology goes Platinum JF - European Urology VL - 50 IS - 3 SP - 569 EP - 573 N2 - 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. KW - compare KW - fulltext KW - holep KW - prosective KW - turp N1 - the rate of resection in TURP group was mentioned about 24/70 AU - Wilson, Liam AU - Gilling, Peter AU - Williams, Andrew AU - Kennett, Katie AU - Frampton, Chris AU - Westenberg, Andre AU - Fraundorfer, Mark PY - 2006/09// UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.04.002 ER -