Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
Abstract:Laparoscopic adenomectomy and ELEP were equally effective for relieving bladder outflow obstruction and lower urinary tract symptoms. The advantages of ELEP include less blood loss, shorter catheterization times, and shorter hospital stays.
“…Umari et al [ 17 ] also reported that four of 45 (8.9%) patients reported transient urinary incontinence following HoLEP, while only one of 81 (1.2%) complained of transient incontinence following RASP. Only one study [ 15 ] evaluated quality of life at 3 and 6 months, showing comparable results ( P = 0.84). Figure 3.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For HoLEP, the conventional Gilling technique was used. The summary of the preoperative parameters for the different studies are listed in Table 1 [1, [14][15][16][17][18].…”
Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A 3-month follow-up was completed in four studies, with statistically comparable post-surgical outcomes (IPSS, PSA level, Q max and PVR) on meta-analysis ( Figure 3 [14][15][16][17]). Only one study [15] continued follow-up to 6 months after surgery, with comparable IPSS [mean (SD) 4.05 (1.23) in the ELEP group vs 4.70 (0.73) in the LSP group, P = 0.052], but a statistically lower PVR in favour of laser enucleation [mean (SD) 33.9 (9.26) vs 44.5 (15) mL, P = 0.011). On the other hand, Baldini et al [16] reported that eight of 39 (25%) patients who underwent HoLEP reported postoperative pollakiuria and urinary urgency, compared to two of 28 (7.1%) in the LSP group.…”
Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of available prospective and retrospective studies comparing the minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) simple prostatectomy (MISP) and laser enucleation of the prostate for treating male lower urinary tract symptoms in high-volume prostates, as laser enucleation of the prostate is the new trend for treating high-volume prostates (>80 mL) but many urologists now prefer MISP. Methods: A systematic search was done using the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Cochrane databases in June 2019, with research terms including: 'laser', 'laparoscopy', 'enucleation', 'BPH', 'simple prostatectomy', 'Millins', and 'adenomectomy'. The meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Of 38 screened articles, six were analysed and a total of 975 men were included. The average operative time, length of stay and catheterisation time were significantly shorter in the laser enucleation group (P = 0.006, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). The amount of prostatic tissue removed during surgery was comparable between both the laser enucleation and MISP groups (P = 0.39). The International Prostate Symptom Score, prostate-specific antigen level, maximum urinary flow rate and post-void residual urine volume were also comparable at 3 months. Finally, similar transfusion rates and Clavien-Dindo complication rates were observed (P = 0.08 and P = 0.41, respectively). Conclusion: This systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis provide a further demonstration of the safety and effectiveness of both laser enucleation and MISP. While laser enucleation had a shorter catheterisation time and hospital stay than MISP, the latter still had unique and specific indications. Abbreviations: ELEP: eraser laser enucleation of the prostate; HoLEP: holmium laser enucleation of the prostate; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; PVR: post-void residual urine volume; Q max : maximum urinary flow rate; (L)(MI)(RA)SP: (laparoscopic) (minimally-invasive) (robot-assisted) simple prostatectomy ARTICLE HISTORY
“…Umari et al [ 17 ] also reported that four of 45 (8.9%) patients reported transient urinary incontinence following HoLEP, while only one of 81 (1.2%) complained of transient incontinence following RASP. Only one study [ 15 ] evaluated quality of life at 3 and 6 months, showing comparable results ( P = 0.84). Figure 3.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For HoLEP, the conventional Gilling technique was used. The summary of the preoperative parameters for the different studies are listed in Table 1 [1, [14][15][16][17][18].…”
Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A 3-month follow-up was completed in four studies, with statistically comparable post-surgical outcomes (IPSS, PSA level, Q max and PVR) on meta-analysis ( Figure 3 [14][15][16][17]). Only one study [15] continued follow-up to 6 months after surgery, with comparable IPSS [mean (SD) 4.05 (1.23) in the ELEP group vs 4.70 (0.73) in the LSP group, P = 0.052], but a statistically lower PVR in favour of laser enucleation [mean (SD) 33.9 (9.26) vs 44.5 (15) mL, P = 0.011). On the other hand, Baldini et al [16] reported that eight of 39 (25%) patients who underwent HoLEP reported postoperative pollakiuria and urinary urgency, compared to two of 28 (7.1%) in the LSP group.…”
Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of available prospective and retrospective studies comparing the minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) simple prostatectomy (MISP) and laser enucleation of the prostate for treating male lower urinary tract symptoms in high-volume prostates, as laser enucleation of the prostate is the new trend for treating high-volume prostates (>80 mL) but many urologists now prefer MISP. Methods: A systematic search was done using the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Cochrane databases in June 2019, with research terms including: 'laser', 'laparoscopy', 'enucleation', 'BPH', 'simple prostatectomy', 'Millins', and 'adenomectomy'. The meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Of 38 screened articles, six were analysed and a total of 975 men were included. The average operative time, length of stay and catheterisation time were significantly shorter in the laser enucleation group (P = 0.006, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). The amount of prostatic tissue removed during surgery was comparable between both the laser enucleation and MISP groups (P = 0.39). The International Prostate Symptom Score, prostate-specific antigen level, maximum urinary flow rate and post-void residual urine volume were also comparable at 3 months. Finally, similar transfusion rates and Clavien-Dindo complication rates were observed (P = 0.08 and P = 0.41, respectively). Conclusion: This systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis provide a further demonstration of the safety and effectiveness of both laser enucleation and MISP. While laser enucleation had a shorter catheterisation time and hospital stay than MISP, the latter still had unique and specific indications. Abbreviations: ELEP: eraser laser enucleation of the prostate; HoLEP: holmium laser enucleation of the prostate; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; PVR: post-void residual urine volume; Q max : maximum urinary flow rate; (L)(MI)(RA)SP: (laparoscopic) (minimally-invasive) (robot-assisted) simple prostatectomy ARTICLE HISTORY
“…We excluded 73 studies after reviewing abstracts and titles, and 6 articles after reading the full text. Finally, 8 studies involving 1,504 patients (492 MISP vs. 1,012 EEP) were included in the present meta-analysis (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19). These studies were published between 2015 and 2021.…”
Section: Literature Search and Study Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among them, one was a prospective study (16), six were retrospective studies (12-15, 18, 19), and one was a prospective randomized study (17). Four studies (12,13,18,19) focused on the comparison of LSP and EEP, three studies (14-16) focused on the comparison of RASP and EEP, and only one study (17) analyzed the comparison of LSP, RASP, and EEP. Additionally, since Fuschi et al (17) reported the comparison of two MISP technologies (LSP and RASP) with EEP, we divided their results into two parts and presented them as Fuschi 2020a (LSP vs. EEP) and Fuschi 2020b (RASP vs. EEP) during data analysis.…”
Section: Literature Search and Study Characteristicsmentioning
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.
