Search

Introduction: The estimated recurrence rate of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) after transurethral resection of the prostate is about 5 to 15%. Laser enucleation of the prostate results in a much lower recurrence rate (not exceeding 1-1.5%). At the same time, laser enucleation of the prostate is still not widely used for recurrent prostatic hyperplasia since it believed to be technically difficult in cases., Aim: To describe the distinctive features of thulium and holmium laser enucleations of the prostate in the management of recurrent BPH and show that the technical difficulties are not an obstacle to the wide application of this technique., Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study comprising 676 patients aged 54 to 87 years with clinically pronounced infravesical obstruction due to prostatic hyperplasia (IPSS>20, Qmax<10). All patients were divided into four groups. Groups 1 (n=489) and 3 (n=153) underwent holmium (HoLEP) and thulium (ThuLEP) laser enucleations of the prostate, respectively. Groups 2 (n=23) and 4 (n=11) included patients with BPH recurrence after HoLEP (group 2) and ThuLEP (group 4). All patients underwent diagnostic evaluation at baseline and at 6 months after surgery., Results: The mean ThuLEP operating time was shorter than that of HoLEP (p=0.02). The mean duration of repeat and primary ThuLEP and HoLEP did not differ statistically significantly (p>0.05). There was no difference in the length of hospitalization and catheterization between the four groups (p>0.05). At six months after surgery, a statistically significant improvement in I-PSS, Qmax, QoL, and RUV was observed in all groups compared with preoperative values (p>0.05))., Conclusion: We found that the technical difficulties of the re-operation, such as the difficult separation of adenomatous tissue from the prostate capsule, the multinodular nature of the adenoma, increased tissue density are easy to overcome and do not confer a significant complexity. In turn, better completeness of resection, low complication and recurrence rates and the possibility of surgery, even in elderly patients with multiple comorbidities - these features allow us to conclude that laser enucleation of the prostate is not only an effective treatment for infravesical obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia, but is also a method of choice in the treatment of patients with recurrent BPH.

The first medical application of lasers dates back to the mid-60s of the XX century. Since then, laser systems have undergone significant changes. No longer a science fiction, lasers are used in many medical fields as an indispensable tool in the hands of the modern physician. The article outlines advances in laser techniques (from the idea of laser radiation to the modern laser systems used as effective surgical tools). We also present our experience in using laser surgical techniques in treating patients with prostatic hyperplasia.

Aim: To compare electro- and laser enucleation (thulium, holmium) of prostate hyperplasia., Material and Methods: 693 prostate hyperplasia patients were enrolled. 489 patients underwent holmium enucleation (HoLEP), 51 - monopolar enucleation, 153 - thulium enucleation (ThuLEP). Prostate volume was 91.7 (50-250) cm 3 . There were no significant differences in preoperative variables between both groups (I-PSS, QoL, Qmax, residual urine volume) (p>0.05)., Results: Mean time of HoLEP was 97.0±42.2 min, monopolar enucleation - 112.9±36.3 min, ThuLEP duration was significantly less (77.4±36.3 min, p<0.01). An efficacy of all methods was confirmed in 6 months after surgery by significant (p<0.01) improvement of functional parameters (I-PSS, QoL, Qmax, residual urine volume)., Conclusion: High efficiency of thulium and holmium enucleation allows to consider them as 'gold standard' of prostate hyperplasia management. Despite higher incidence of complications an efficacy of monopolar enucleation is comparable to that in laser techniques.

Introduction: and objectives. Most of modern endoscopic procedures (e.g., TURP) are only confined to small and medium-sized glands (up to 80 cm3), but not HoLEP, which allows to enucleate large and extremely large prostates (200 cm3). The aim of the study was to compare the efficiency of HoLEP for prostates of different sizes., Method: s. A total of 459 patients were divided into three groups: Group 1 included 278 patients (prostate volume <100 cm3); mean prostate volume, 70.8+/-16.1 cm3; IPSS, 18.7+/-5.5; QoL, 4.1+/-0.5; Qmax, 6.2+/-1.5 mL/s; post-voided residual volume, 64.2+/-30.5 mL. Group 2 included 169 patients (prostate volume 100-200 cm3); mean prostate volume, 148.1+/-25.2 cm3; IPSS, 19.7+/-3.3; QoL, 4.2+/-0.7; Qmax, 5.9+/-0.7 mL/s; post-voided residual volume, 70.9+/-20.1 mL. Group 3 included 12 patients (prostate volume >200 cm3); mean prostate volume, 230.1+/-18.1 cm3; IPSS, 19.5+/-4.5; QoL, 4.1+/-0.3; Qmax, 4.7+/-0.9 mL/s; post-voided residual volume, 72.3+/-10.9 mL. All the patients underwent HoLEP from 2013 to 2015. For the prostate to be enucleated, a 100-W laser system, 550-micron end-fire fiber, and a morcellator for tissue evacuation were used., Results: The average duration of surgery in Group 1 was 56.5+/-10.7 min; in group 2, 96.4+/-24.9 min; in Group 3, 120.9+/-35 min. The average duration of morcellation in Group 1 was 37.5+/-7.3 min; in Group 2, 63.3+/-11.2 min; in Group 3, 84.0+/-25.6 min. The efficiency of enucleation in Group 3 (1.70 g/min) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than in Group 1 (1.05 g/min) and Group 2 (1.23 g/min). Similar results were obtained for the efficiency of morcellation. It was lower in Group 1 and Group 2 (1.58 and 1.87 g/min, respectively) than in Group 3 (2.45 g/min) (p<0.05). In order to compare the long-term results of HoLEP for prostates of different sizes, all the 459 patients were followed up for 18 months. IPSS, Qmax, QoL, and post-voided residual volumes were measured. There were no significant differences (p>0.05) in the postoperative outcomes for 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after surgery., Conclusions: It follows from our two years experience that HoLEP is a safe, highly efficacious and a size-independent procedure, which is why it has become a new gold standard for treatment of extremely large prostatic hyperplasia in our clinic.