Investig Clin Urol.
2021 May;62(3):298-304. 10.4111/icu.20200450.
Efficacy of holmium laser enucleation in patients with a small (less than 30 mL) prostate volume
- Tsuboi I
1,7 - Maruyama Y2,7
- Sadahira T2,7
- Ando N3,7
- Nishiyama Y4,7
- Araki M2,7
- Kurashige T5,7
- Ichikawa T6,7
- Arata R4,7
- Ono N4,7
- Watanabe T2,7
- Hayata S5,7
- Shiina H1
- Nasu Y2,7
- Affiliations
-
- 1Department of Urology, Shimane University Faculty of Medicine, Shimane, Japan.
- 2Department of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama, Japan.
- 3Department of Urology, Kagawa Rosai Hospital, Kagawa, Japan.
- 4Department of Urology, Kochi Health Sciences Center, Kochi, Japan.
- 5Department of Urology, Tottori Municipal Hospital, Tottori, Japan.
- 6Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, Okayama, Japan.
- 7Okayama Urological Research Group, Okayama, Japan.
- KMID: 2515323
- DOI: http://doi.org/10.4111/icu.20200450
Abstract
- Purpose
To evaluate the efficacy of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in patients with a small prostate volume (≤30 mL).
Materials and Methods
We retrospectively evaluated 1,135 patients who underwent HoLEP at two institutions between July 2007 and March 2020. Patients who were not evaluated for the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) before or after HoLEP were excluded. We divided patients into two groups according to estimated prostate volume (ePV): ≤30 (n=198) and >30 mL (n=539). The patient characteristics, IPSS, peak urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), and other data were compared before and after surgery in each group and between the two groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the efficacy of HoLEP in the group with ePV ≤30 mL.
Results
A total of 737 patients were included in this retrospective study. ePV (23.4 mL vs. 50 mL; p<0.001) and PVR differed significantly between the two groups. The IPSS, IPSS-quality of life, PVR, and Qmax significantly improved after HoLEP in both groups. Improvements in the IPSS, IPSS-quality of life, Qmax, and PVR were greater in the >30 mL group (p<0.001), whereas operation time and morcellation time were significantly shorter in the ≤30 mL group. In the multivariate analysis, age <70 years was independently associated with improvement by HoLEP.
Conclusions
HoLEP is an effective treatment for patients with a small prostate, even though the extent of improvement after HoLEP was greater in those with a larger prostate.
- Full Text Links
-
- Actions
-
Cited
- CITED
-
- Close
- Share
-
- Similar articles
-
- Enucleated Weight/Enucleation Time, Is It Appropriate for Estimating Enucleation Skills for Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate? A Consideration of Energy Consumption
- Technical Aspects of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
- Current surgical techniques of enucleation in holmium laser enucleation of the prostate
- Efficacy of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate in Patients with a Small Prostate (≤30 mL)
- Von Brunn’s Nest in an Incidental Bladder Mass Found during Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate
