Vestnik Urologii (Apr 2024)

Holmium laser enucleation for large prostate hyperplasia: assessment of functional outcomes and postoperative complications

  • S. V. Kotov,
  • R. A. Perov,
  • I. A. Zhestkov,
  • A. A. Novikov,
  • A. A. Nemenov

DOI
https://doi.org/10.21886/2308-6424-2024-12-2-33-42
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 2
pp. 33 – 42

Abstract

Read online

Introduction. To date, there has been insufficient research into the prostate volume as a factor that may influence the effectiveness and safety of surgical treatments. With the advent of relatively new laser techniques, it is important to take a closer look at this parameter, especially considering the success of these techniques in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) of various volumes.Objective. To assess the functional outcomes and postoperative complications of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) depending on its volume.Materials & Methods. We performed a prospective study of HoLEP on 252 patients. Patients were divided into two groups according to their prostate volume: Group I included 206 patients (81%) with a prostate volume of < 100 mL, and Group II included 46 patients (19%) with a prostate volume ≥ 100 mL.Results. The prostate volume was the most significant prognostic factor regarding duration of surgery. This indicator significantly differed between the two groups. Group I had an average surgery time of 67.1 ± 26.7 minutes, while Group II had a time of 98.1 ± 24.2 minutes (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the number of complications between the groups — 36 cases (17.5%) in Group I and 12 cases (26%) in Group II, as well as functional results of urination between the groups. In the early postoperative period, the Q max in Group I was 17.4 ± 9.1 ml/s, in Group II — 18.2 ± 10.9 ml/s (p > 0.05), PVR — 52 ± 39.4 and 56 ± 31.8 ml (p > 0.05), respectively. After 3 months of observation, there were also no differences in the studied parameters: IPSS — 5.7 ± 4.1 vs 6.2 ± 4.9 points; QoL — 1.0 ± 0.9 vs 1.1 ± 0.9 points; Q max — 18.9 ± 6.7 vs 20.3 ± 11.5 ml/s; PVR — 53.5 ± 33.1 vs 54.9 ± 30.6 ml (p > 0.05).Conclusion. HoLEP is an effective and safe method of treating patients with different volumes of BPH. However, the duration of the procedure is an important factor that influences the surgery outcome, as it correlates with the prostate volume.

Keywords