Search

Purpose: We evaluated the effects of transurethral needle ablation and prostate resection on pressure flow urodynamic parameters in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), compared symptomatic and objective parameters of efficacy 6 months after initial treatment, and determined whether urodynamic assessment may predict symptomatic improvement., Materials and Methods: We enrolled 121 patients with clinical BPH, American Urological Association symptom index of 13 or greater and maximum urinary flow of 12 ml. per second or less in a randomized study comparing transurethral needle ablation to prostate resection at 7 institutions in the United States. Patients underwent baseline and followup assessments at 6 months, including pressure flow studies., Results: Patients who underwent each procedure had statistically and clinically significant improvement in symptom index, BPH impact index and quality of life score. After needle ablation and prostate resection maximum flow improved from 8.8 to 13.5 (p<0.0001) and 8.8 to 20.8 ml. per second (p<0.0001), detrusor pressure at maximum flow decreased from 78.7 to 64.5 (p = 0.036) and 75.8 to 54.9 cm. water (p<0.001), and the Abrams-Griffiths number decreased from 61.2 to 37.2 (p<0.001) and 58.3 to 10.9 (p<0.001), respectively. At 6 months the differences in transurethral needle ablation and prostate resection were significant in terms of maximum flow (p<0.001) and the Abrams-Griffiths number (p<0.001) but not detrusor pressure at maximum flow or symptom assessment tools. The presence or absence of urinary obstruction at baseline did not predict the degree of symptomatic improvement in either treatment group., Conclusions: Transurethral needle ablation and prostate resection induce statistically and clinically significant improvement in various quantitative symptom assessment questionnaires at 6 months. The parameters of free flow rates and invasive pressure flow studies also significantly improve after each treatment. However, transurethral prostate resection induces a significantly greater decrease in the parameters of obstruction. Baseline urodynamic parameters do not predict the degree of symptomatic improvement and they may not be helpful in patient selection for transurethral needle ablation.

Purpose: We assess the 1-year efficacy and safety of transurethral needle ablation of the prostate compared to transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)., Materials and Methods: A prospective, randomized clinical trial of 121 men 50 years old or older with symptomatic BPH was performed at 7 medical centers across the United States. Of the men 65 (54%) were treated with transurethral needle ablation of the prostate and 56 (46%) underwent transurethral resection of the prostate. Mean and percentage changes from baseline and between cohorts for American Urological Association (AUA) symptom score, AUA bother score, quality of life score, peak urinary flow rate and post-void residual urine volume were measured at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months following treatment. Length of procedure, hospitalization, type of anesthesia, post-procedure catheterization, side effects and sexual function were compared., Results: Transurethral needle ablation and resection resulted in a statistically significant improvement in AUA symptom, bother and quality of life scores, peak urinary flow rate and post-void residual. At 1-year followup, needle ablation and resection were equally effective in enhancing quality of life. Needle ablation had less effect on sexual function, with resection being associated with a greater incidence of retrograde ejaculation. Needle ablation could be performed as an outpatient procedure with local anesthesia while resection required anesthesia and hospitalization. Needle ablation was associated with markedly fewer side effects than resection., Conclusions: Compared to transurethral resection of the prostate, transurethral needle ablation of the prostate is an efficacious, minimally invasive treatment for symptomatic BPH that is associated with few side effects.

Objectives: To report the safety and efficacy of the transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) procedure for the treatment of clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)., Methods: One hundred thirty patients with BPH were enrolled in two identical protocols and treated by the TUNA procedure. Entry criteria included an American Urological Association symptom index (AUA SI) of 13 points or higher and a peak flow rate of 12 mL/s or less. Patients were followed up for 12 months. Efficacy parameters included the AUA SI, AUA problem index, BPH impact index (BPH II), quality of life (QOL) score, and peak flow rate. At each visit, side effects were elicited. Follow-up data are available for 93 patients at 12 months. All patients were given intraurethral lidocaine augmented by oral and/or parenteral sedation. No patient received spinal or general anesthesia., Results: All patients tolerated the procedure well, and there were no deaths. Forty-one percent of patients (n = 53) had a catheter placed immediately after the procedure. At 12 months, the AUA SI had decreased from 23.7 to 11.9 (P < 0.0001) and the BPH II from 7.5 to 2.5 (P < 0.0001), whereas the peak flow rate had increased from 8.7 to 14.6 mL/s (P < 0.0001). Irritative voiding symptoms were noted in 20 patients (16%) at some point during follow-up. Two patients reported erectile dysfunction, and 1 reported retrograde ejaculation., Conclusions: In this prospective study of 130 patients with clinical BPH and lower urinary tract symptoms, TUNA provided substantive and lasting improvement according to AUA SI, BPH II, and QOL scores as well as peak flow rate over 1 year. The TUNA procedure was well tolerated, with few major side effects and complications noted. Longer follow-up is needed to document the maintenance of clinical benefit beyond 12 months.