Cargando…

Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years

INTRODUCTION: Successful outcomes have been reported for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) with the prostatic urethral lift (PUL) in a number of clinical investigations. Our aim was to investigate PUL outcomes in patients treated in a day-to-day clinical setting without the rigid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sievert, Karl-Dietrich, Schonthaler, Martin, Berges, Richard, Toomey, Patricia, Drager, Desiree, Herlemann, Annika, Miller, Florian, Wetterauer, Ulrich, Volkmer, Bjorn, Gratzke, Christian, Amend, Bastian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6620255/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30283994
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2494-1
_version_ 1783434009173295104
author Sievert, Karl-Dietrich
Schonthaler, Martin
Berges, Richard
Toomey, Patricia
Drager, Desiree
Herlemann, Annika
Miller, Florian
Wetterauer, Ulrich
Volkmer, Bjorn
Gratzke, Christian
Amend, Bastian
author_facet Sievert, Karl-Dietrich
Schonthaler, Martin
Berges, Richard
Toomey, Patricia
Drager, Desiree
Herlemann, Annika
Miller, Florian
Wetterauer, Ulrich
Volkmer, Bjorn
Gratzke, Christian
Amend, Bastian
author_sort Sievert, Karl-Dietrich
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Successful outcomes have been reported for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) with the prostatic urethral lift (PUL) in a number of clinical investigations. Our aim was to investigate PUL outcomes in patients treated in a day-to-day clinical setting without the rigid exclusion criteria of clinical studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated the outcome of the PUL procedure at five German departments during the initial period when PUL was approved for the clinic (10/2012–06/2014). All candidates for transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) received PUL information and were given the choice of procedures. The only exclusion criterion was an obstructive median lobe. No patients were excluded because of high post-void residual volume (PVR), prostate size, retention history or LUTS oral therapy. Maximum urinary flow (Qmax), PVR, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Quality of Life (QOL) were assessed at baseline, 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. RESULTS: Of 212 TURP candidates, 86 choose PUL. A mean of 3.8 (2–7) UroLift implants were implanted in patients of 38–85 years with a prostate size of 17–111 ml over 57 (42–90) min under general or local anesthesia. Thirty-eight (38.4%) patients had severe BPH obstruction and would have been denied PUL utilizing previously reported study criteria. Within 1 month 74 (86%) reported substantial symptom relief with significant improvements in Qmax, PVR, IPSS, and QOL (p < 0.001) that was maintained within the follow-up. Sexual function including ejaculation was unchanged or improved. No Clavien–Dindo Grad ≥ 2 was reported postoperatively. Eleven (12.8%) patients were retreated over 2 years. Twelve (86%) of 14 patients presenting with chronic urinary retention were catheter free at last follow-up. CONCLUSION: PUL is a promising surgical technique that may alleviate LUTS, even in patients with severe obstruction.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6620255
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66202552019-07-28 Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years Sievert, Karl-Dietrich Schonthaler, Martin Berges, Richard Toomey, Patricia Drager, Desiree Herlemann, Annika Miller, Florian Wetterauer, Ulrich Volkmer, Bjorn Gratzke, Christian Amend, Bastian World J Urol Original Article INTRODUCTION: Successful outcomes have been reported for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) with the prostatic urethral lift (PUL) in a number of clinical investigations. Our aim was to investigate PUL outcomes in patients treated in a day-to-day clinical setting without the rigid exclusion criteria of clinical studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated the outcome of the PUL procedure at five German departments during the initial period when PUL was approved for the clinic (10/2012–06/2014). All candidates for transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) received PUL information and were given the choice of procedures. The only exclusion criterion was an obstructive median lobe. No patients were excluded because of high post-void residual volume (PVR), prostate size, retention history or LUTS oral therapy. Maximum urinary flow (Qmax), PVR, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Quality of Life (QOL) were assessed at baseline, 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. RESULTS: Of 212 TURP candidates, 86 choose PUL. A mean of 3.8 (2–7) UroLift implants were implanted in patients of 38–85 years with a prostate size of 17–111 ml over 57 (42–90) min under general or local anesthesia. Thirty-eight (38.4%) patients had severe BPH obstruction and would have been denied PUL utilizing previously reported study criteria. Within 1 month 74 (86%) reported substantial symptom relief with significant improvements in Qmax, PVR, IPSS, and QOL (p < 0.001) that was maintained within the follow-up. Sexual function including ejaculation was unchanged or improved. No Clavien–Dindo Grad ≥ 2 was reported postoperatively. Eleven (12.8%) patients were retreated over 2 years. Twelve (86%) of 14 patients presenting with chronic urinary retention were catheter free at last follow-up. CONCLUSION: PUL is a promising surgical technique that may alleviate LUTS, even in patients with severe obstruction. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018-10-03 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6620255/ /pubmed/30283994 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2494-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Sievert, Karl-Dietrich
Schonthaler, Martin
Berges, Richard
Toomey, Patricia
Drager, Desiree
Herlemann, Annika
Miller, Florian
Wetterauer, Ulrich
Volkmer, Bjorn
Gratzke, Christian
Amend, Bastian
Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years
title Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years
title_full Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years
title_fullStr Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years
title_full_unstemmed Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years
title_short Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years
title_sort minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (pul) efficacious in turp candidates: a multicenter german evaluation after 2 years
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6620255/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30283994
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2494-1
work_keys_str_mv AT sievertkarldietrich minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT schonthalermartin minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT bergesrichard minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT toomeypatricia minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT dragerdesiree minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT herlemannannika minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT millerflorian minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT wetterauerulrich minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT volkmerbjorn minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT gratzkechristian minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years
AT amendbastian minimallyinvasiveprostaticurethralliftpulefficaciousinturpcandidatesamulticentergermanevaluationafter2years