Cargando…

Holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate the safety and efficacy of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and simple prostatectomy for large prostate burdens, as discussion and debate continue about the optimal surgical intervention for this common pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systemati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jones, Patrick, Alzweri, Laith, Rai, Bhavan Prasad, Somani, Bhaskar K., Bates, Chris, Aboumarzouk, Omar M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4767783/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26966594
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2015.10.001
_version_ 1782417842517311488
author Jones, Patrick
Alzweri, Laith
Rai, Bhavan Prasad
Somani, Bhaskar K.
Bates, Chris
Aboumarzouk, Omar M.
author_facet Jones, Patrick
Alzweri, Laith
Rai, Bhavan Prasad
Somani, Bhaskar K.
Bates, Chris
Aboumarzouk, Omar M.
author_sort Jones, Patrick
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate the safety and efficacy of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and simple prostatectomy for large prostate burdens, as discussion and debate continue about the optimal surgical intervention for this common pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search was conducted for studies comparing HoLEP with simple prostatectomy [open (OP), robot-assisted, laparoscopic] using a sensitive strategy and in accordance with Cochrane collaboration guidelines. Primary parameters of interest were objective measurements including maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR), and subjective outcomes including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL). Secondary outcomes of interest included volume of tissue retrieved, catheterisation time, hospital stay, blood loss and serum sodium decrease. Data on baseline characteristics and complications were also collected. Where possible, comparable data were combined and meta-analysis was conducted. RESULTS: In all, 310 articles were identified and after screening abstracts (114) and full manuscripts (14), three randomised studies (263 patients) were included, which met our pre-defined inclusion criteria. All these compared HoLEP with OP. The mean transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) volume was 113.9 mL in the HoLEP group and 119.4 mL in the OP group. There was no statistically significant difference in Q(max), PVR, IPSS and QoL at 12 and 24 months between the two interventions. OP was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (P = 0.01) and greater tissue retrieved (P < 0.001). However, with HoLEP there was significantly less blood loss (P < 0.001), patients had a shorter hospital stay (P = 0.03), and were catheterised for significantly fewer hours (P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in the total number of complications recorded amongst HoLEP and OP (P = 0.80). CONCLUSION: The results of the meta-analysis have shown that HoLEP and OP possess similar overall efficacy profiles for both objective and subjective disease status outcome measures. This review shows these improvements persist to at least the 24 month follow-up point. Further randomised studies are warranted to fully determine the optimal surgical intervention for large prostate burdens.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4767783
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47677832016-03-10 Holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis Jones, Patrick Alzweri, Laith Rai, Bhavan Prasad Somani, Bhaskar K. Bates, Chris Aboumarzouk, Omar M. Arab J Urol Prostatic Disorders Review OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate the safety and efficacy of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and simple prostatectomy for large prostate burdens, as discussion and debate continue about the optimal surgical intervention for this common pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search was conducted for studies comparing HoLEP with simple prostatectomy [open (OP), robot-assisted, laparoscopic] using a sensitive strategy and in accordance with Cochrane collaboration guidelines. Primary parameters of interest were objective measurements including maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR), and subjective outcomes including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL). Secondary outcomes of interest included volume of tissue retrieved, catheterisation time, hospital stay, blood loss and serum sodium decrease. Data on baseline characteristics and complications were also collected. Where possible, comparable data were combined and meta-analysis was conducted. RESULTS: In all, 310 articles were identified and after screening abstracts (114) and full manuscripts (14), three randomised studies (263 patients) were included, which met our pre-defined inclusion criteria. All these compared HoLEP with OP. The mean transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) volume was 113.9 mL in the HoLEP group and 119.4 mL in the OP group. There was no statistically significant difference in Q(max), PVR, IPSS and QoL at 12 and 24 months between the two interventions. OP was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (P = 0.01) and greater tissue retrieved (P < 0.001). However, with HoLEP there was significantly less blood loss (P < 0.001), patients had a shorter hospital stay (P = 0.03), and were catheterised for significantly fewer hours (P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in the total number of complications recorded amongst HoLEP and OP (P = 0.80). CONCLUSION: The results of the meta-analysis have shown that HoLEP and OP possess similar overall efficacy profiles for both objective and subjective disease status outcome measures. This review shows these improvements persist to at least the 24 month follow-up point. Further randomised studies are warranted to fully determine the optimal surgical intervention for large prostate burdens. Elsevier 2016-03 2015-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4767783/ /pubmed/26966594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2015.10.001 Text en © 2015 Arab Association of Urology. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Prostatic Disorders Review
Jones, Patrick
Alzweri, Laith
Rai, Bhavan Prasad
Somani, Bhaskar K.
Bates, Chris
Aboumarzouk, Omar M.
Holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort holmium laser enucleation versus simple prostatectomy for treating large prostates: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Prostatic Disorders Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4767783/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26966594
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2015.10.001
work_keys_str_mv AT jonespatrick holmiumlaserenucleationversussimpleprostatectomyfortreatinglargeprostatesresultsofasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT alzwerilaith holmiumlaserenucleationversussimpleprostatectomyfortreatinglargeprostatesresultsofasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT raibhavanprasad holmiumlaserenucleationversussimpleprostatectomyfortreatinglargeprostatesresultsofasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT somanibhaskark holmiumlaserenucleationversussimpleprostatectomyfortreatinglargeprostatesresultsofasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT bateschris holmiumlaserenucleationversussimpleprostatectomyfortreatinglargeprostatesresultsofasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT aboumarzoukomarm holmiumlaserenucleationversussimpleprostatectomyfortreatinglargeprostatesresultsofasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis