The results of holmium laser resection of the prostate

Mackey,; Chilton,; Gilling,; Fraundorfer, Friedrich; Cresswell,

doi:10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00618.x

Cited by 28 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results show a 45–48% improvement in AUA‐SI and a 46–49% improvement in QoL by 4 months after HoLRP, which are slightly less than in previous reports [16,17,23]. We also report a 12.6% complication rate, which is consistent with previous studies [16,17,23]. The present results were also similar to those reported by Kabalin et al.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Holmium laser prostatic resection for patients presenting with acute urinary retention

Anderson¹,

Helfand²,

McVary³

2008

BJU International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE To compare the outcomes of patients presenting with and without acute urinary retention (AUR) who were treated with 100‐W holmium laser resection of the prostate (HoLRP), as laser therapies, including HoLRP, have been used for treating lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), but the effectiveness of HoLRP for patients with AUR has not been fully elucidated. PATIENTS AND METHODS The medical records of 87 patients who had HoLRP were reviewed, and prospective questionnaires aimed at determining patients’ American Urologic Association Symptom Index (AUA‐SI) and Quality‐of‐Life (QoL) scores and medication usage were also obtained. Statistical analyses were used to compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes between patients with and with no AUR for up to 2 years after HoLRP. RESULTS All patients had the catheter removed successfully by 1 month after surgery; those presenting with AUR tended to have a greater improvement in clinical outcomes than those with no AUR, including a mean AUA‐SI score decrease by ≈13 and ≈8 points, and a QoL score decrease by ≈2 and ≈1.4 points, respectively. These decreases were maintained throughout the study period. Patients with AUR had significantly greater decreases in their postvoid residual urine volume than those with no AUR. Serum prostate‐specific antigen levels also had a modest but sustained decrease (14%) in both groups. There were no significant decreases in the reported use of BPH‐related medications after surgery in either group. CONCLUSIONS HoLRP (100 W) is a safe and effective surgical therapy for patients presenting with AUR. The present results suggest that the short‐ and long‐term outcomes of these patients are similar between men presenting with and with no AUR.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Holmium laser prostatic resection for patients presenting with acute urinary retention

Anderson¹,

Helfand²,

McVary³

2008

BJU International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mackey et al assessed the results of HoLRP in 967 patients (mean age 69 years, range 44-89 years) with BPH (mean prostate volume 52 ml, range 10-200 ml) between 1994 and 1997 (28). The patients were followed at 1, 3 and 6months after treatment using AUA symptom score and Qmax.…”

Section: Clinical Results With the Holmium: Yag Laser Resection Of Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

Holmium laser for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: old wine in a new bottle?

Nelius

Riese

2003

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia affect 70% of men older than 70 years. Complications are common problems and a significant cause of morbidity in this population, placing a considerable burden on health services.In the early 1990s laser treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia became widely used after the introduction of the side-firing neodym: YAG laser. However, because of technical limitations and inferior results compared to classical transurethral resection of the prostate many Urologists became desinterested in this device. With the introduction of the holmium: YAG laser a new laser generation became available for use in Urology. Beside several other applications the holmium: YAG laser can be used for incision, ablation, resection, and more recently enucleation of the prostate.In this paper we reviewed the current literature regarding the holmium: YAG laser resection and enucleation of the prostate compared to transurethral resection of the prostate and open prostatectomy.The holmium: YAG laser technique is an effective and durable surgical alternative to standard transurethral resection of the prostate. Interestingly, enucleation of the prostate with this device seems to be a safe and effective procedure for large prostatic adenomas, it may become an attractive alternative to open prostatectomy.

show abstract

“…Holmium laser resection has enjoyed recent favour, but despite a very large combined case series [17] reporting mean¯ow rates of 22.3 mL/s and AUA symptom scores of 4.8 at 6 months, there remains a need for a large RCT with long-term follow-up. Similarly, the publication of the long-term data from the multicentre RCT using the Indigo diffuser tip is eagerly awaited.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A double‐blind randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of transurethral resection vs contact laser vaporization for benign prostatic enlargement: a 3‐year follow‐up

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the effect of contact laser prostate surgery in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Patients and methods A prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and contact laser prostatectomy was conducted, with an economic evaluation of both procedures. The primary outcome measure was the change in the American Urologic Association symptom score, with secondary outcome measures being the peak urinary¯ow rate, treatment-related complications, re-operation rate and health service costs. Results The perioperative blood loss and transfusion requirements were statistically signi®cantly lower for laser prostatectomy than for TURP. There was no clinically signi®cant difference between TURP and contact laser prostatectomy in the mean change in symptom scores and¯ow rates. There were distinct perioperative advantages in favour of the contact laser treatment, but some disadvantages in terms of recatheterization and re-operation rates. Conclusions Contact laser prostatectomy is a valid treatment for benign prostatic hypertrophy. The performance of contact laser prostatectomy as daycase surgery would have cost advantages to the National Health Service.

show abstract

The results of holmium laser resection of the prostate

Cited by 28 publications

References 5 publications

Holmium laser prostatic resection for patients presenting with acute urinary retention

Holmium laser prostatic resection for patients presenting with acute urinary retention

Holmium laser for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: old wine in a new bottle?

A double‐blind randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of transurethral resection vs contact laser vaporization for benign prostatic enlargement: a 3‐year follow‐up

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About