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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |