Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of a novel thulium fiber laser for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate with monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate in patients with smaller glands (<80 cc). Methods: A total of 51 patients underwent thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate, and 52 patients underwent monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. All patients were assessed preoperatively, and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively (International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum urine flow rate, International Prostate Symptom Score-quality of life). Preoperative prostate volumes and prostate-specific antigen levels were comparable (P = 0.543 and P = 0.078, respectively). The complications were graded according to the Clavien classification. Results: Mean surgery time was longer in the thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate group (46.6 AE 10.2 vs 39.9 AE 8.6 min, P < 0.001), while catheterization and hospital stay were greater in the transurethral resection of the prostate group (P < 0.001). At 12 months, there were no differences in functional outcomes (International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum urine flow rate). Despite comparable prostate volumes at 12 months (P = 0.864), the prostate-specific antigen level in the thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate group (0.5 AE 0.5 ng/mL) was lower than in the transurethral resection of the prostate group (1.1 AE 1.0 ng/mL; P < 0.001). Hemoglobin and serum sodium decrease was lower in the thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate group (1.01 AE 0.4 g/dL and 1.1 AE 1.1 mmol/L) than in the transurethral resection of the prostate group (1.8 AE 0.8 g/dL and 4.1 AE 1.1 mmol/L; P < 0.001). Urinary incontinence rates at 12 months were comparable (P = 0.316). Conclusions: Thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate with novel thulium fiber laser in patients with smaller prostate glands (<80 cc) is comparable to transurethral resection of the prostate in voiding parameters improvement and complication rates. At the same time, the technique allows for a more substantial prostate-specific antigen decrease, indicating more complete removal of adenoma.Key words: benign prostatic hyperplasia, endoscopic enucleation of the prostate, enucleation of the prostate, thulium fiber laser, transurethral resection of the prostate.
<b><i>Objective:</i></b> To critically appraise the methodological rigour of the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) vis-à-vis BPH surgery as used by specialist research associations in the US, Europe and UK, and to compare whether the guidelines cover all or only some of the available treatments. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The current guidelines issued by the EUA, AUA and NICE associations have been analyzed by 4 appraisers using the AGREE-II instrument. We also compared the recommendations given in the guidelines for surgical and minimally invasive treatment to find out which of these CPGs include most of the available treatment options. <b><i>Results:</i></b> According to the AGREE II tool, the median scores of domains were: domain 1 scope and purpose 66.7%, domain 2 stakeholder involvement 50.0%, domain 3 rigor of development 65.1%, domain 4 clarity of presentation 80.6%, domain 5 applicability 33.3%, domain 6 editorial independence 72.9%. The overall assessment according to AGREE II is 83.3%. The NICE guideline scored highest on 5 out of 6 domains and the highest overall assessment score (91.6%). The EAU guideline scored lowest on 4 out of 6 domains and has the lowest overall assessment score (79.1%). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The analyzed CPGs comprehensively highlight the minimally invasive and surgical treatment options for BPH. According to the AGREE II tool, the domains for clarity of presentation and editorial independence received the highest scores. The stakeholder involvement and applicability domains were ranked as the lowest. Improving the CPG in these domains may help to improve the clinical utility and applicability of CPGs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.