Abstract
It has previously been shown that holmium laser resection of the prostate (HoLRP) is superior to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) with regard to perioperative morbidity and is equivalent to TURP in the short term. We present the long-term results of a randomized, prospective trial comparing HoLRP to TURP since information regarding the durability of holmium prostatectomy is lacking in the literature to date. A total of 120 patients with urodynamic obstruction were randomized (April 1996 to August 1997) into 2 comparable groups and assigned to HoLRP or TURP. All patients were assessed preoperatively and followed prospectively at 3 weeks, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 48 months postoperatively with an American Urological Association symptom score, quality of life score, peak urinary flow rate, and questionnaires concerning sexual function and continence. Preoperative pressure flow studies, ultrasound prostatic volume assessment and post-void residual volume measurement were repeated at the 6-month visit. All adverse events were noted. Of 120 patients 73 completed the 48-month assessment. HoLRP and TURP resulted in significant improvements in all parameters. There was no difference between the 2 techniques in terms of urodynamic parameters, potency, continence and symptom scores at the 48-month assessment. HoLRP took significantly longer to perform but perioperative morbidity, catheter time, nursing contact time and hospital stay were significantly less for HoLRP compared to TURP. HoLRP and TURP give equivalent and satisfactory long-term results, with no differences noted in major morbidity. This confirms the durability of these 2 treatments. Peri-operative morbidity is less with HoLRP.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.