Long-Term Results of Lower Energy Transurethral Microwave Thermotherapy

Abstract

At 5 years after transurethral microwave thermotherapy 41% of the patients received instrumental treatment. Patients with a lower Madsen score and lower residual volume, and those with higher peak flow and age were somewhat better responders to lower energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy.

Long–Term Outcome of Transrectal High– Intensity Focused Ultrasound Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

“…The long–time efficacy of transrectal HIFU has to be compared to competing thermoablation techniques, such as low– and high–energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT), transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) and interstitial laser coagulation [1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15]. It needs to be emphasised that there are only few long–term data available with follow–ups comparable to our series.…”

“…Only 23% of the initially treated group were satisfied with the treatment outcome and two thirds had received supplementary BPH treatment [11]. Keijzers et al [12]reported on the 5–year follow–up data of 231 patients following low–energy TUMT. 41% underwent invasive retreatment (TURP, laser prostatectomy) within 5 years and 17% received medical BPH therapy [12].…”

“…Keijzers et al [12]reported on the 5–year follow–up data of 231 patients following low–energy TUMT. 41% underwent invasive retreatment (TURP, laser prostatectomy) within 5 years and 17% received medical BPH therapy [12]. Following TUNA, Rosario et al [16]reported that 31% had to undergo TURP within 12 months after therapy; in Steele and Sleep’s [] ]series, this percentage was 12.7%.…”

“…Prostate volume or the energy delivered to the prostate had no impact on the results [11]. Keijzers et al [12]observed that patients with lower Madsen score, lower residual volume, higher Qmax and older age responded better to low–energy TUMT. Comparable data were reported in our series, as patients with higher Qmax/QM90, smaller PVR and lower grades of BOO as defined by pQs had a longer retreatment–free period.…”

Transurethral Microwave Thermotherapy for Symptomatic benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Long–Term Durability with Prostcare

“…The advantages of TUMT include the use of local anesthesia only, no blood loss, no or minimal influence on erection or ejaculation despite a higher incidence of urinary retention following thermotherapy [2]. Despite numerous studies unequivocally supporting efficacy and safety of TUMT for treatment of symptomatic BPH, several reports have questioned the long–term durability of low–energy TUMT (LE–TUMT) with overall retreatment rates either instrumentally/invasively or pharmocologically at 3–5 years following thermotherapy ranging from 31 to 58% with various devices [3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]. However, to our knowledge, there has been no report to date covering the long–term durability of TUMT with Prostcare in the literature.…”