MP25-07 EJACULATORY SPARING PHOTO SELECTIVE VAPORIZATION OF THE PROSTATE VS BIPOLAR BUTTON PLASMA VAPORIZATION OF THE PROSTATE IN THE SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF BPH

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Surgical Therapy & New Technology I (MP25)1 Apr 2020MP25-07 EJACULATORY SPARING PHOTO SELECTIVE VAPORIZATION OF THE PROSTATE VS BIPOLAR BUTTON PLASMA VAPORIZATION OF THE PROSTATE IN THE SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF BPH Mitali Kini*, Alexis Te, James Kashanian, Steven Kaplan, and Bilal Chughtai Mitali Kini*Mitali Kini* More articles by this author , Alexis TeAlexis Te More articles by this author , James KashanianJames Kashanian More articles by this author , Steven KaplanSteven Kaplan More articles by this author , and Bilal ChughtaiBilal Chughtai More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000864.07AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: After transurethral prostatectomy, erectile dysfunction (ED) and ejaculatory dysfunction (EjD) are significant concerns for patients. We compared ejaculatory hood sparing technique in patients who underwent Photo Selective Vaporization of the Prostate using the Greenlight Laser (EjS-PVP) to the Bipolar Button Plasma Vaporization of the Prostate (EjS-BPVP) in the surgical management of BPH. METHODS: 27 patients were randomized to either undergo EjS-PVP or EjS-BPVP from August 2016 to March 2018. All of the patients were sexually active with antegrade ejaculation prior to prostatectomy. We evaluated International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Quality of Life (QoL), peak flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine (PVR), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and ejaculatory function by the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ). Men were evaluated preoperatively and at 1, 3 and 6 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was ejaculation preservation measured as no change or preservation in antegrade ejaculate at the last follow-up visit by MSHQ (6-months). RESULTS: 27 patients with a mean age of 65.6 years (±8.4) underwent either EjS-BPVP or EjS-PVP (Table 1). There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Improvements in IPSS, QoL, Qmax and PVR were durable throughout the study period in both groups. There was no difference in outcomes between groups. Postoperatively, there was no change in ejaculatory function with ejaculatory hood sparing EjS-BPVP utilizing either 180W EjS-PVP or bipolar energy. The change in MSHQ Ejaculation Scale was -2.1 and -5.4 at 6 months in both arms. The 6-month ejaculatory preservation rate was 85% in the EjS-PVP group and 78% in the EjS-BPVP group. CONCLUSIONS: Ejaculatory Hood Sparing Greenlight photoselective vaporization and bipolar plasma button vaporization is a safe and effective method for treating men with LUTs secondary to BPH with maintenance of antegrade ejaculation. Source of Funding: Boston Scientific © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e393-e393 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Mitali Kini* More articles by this author Alexis Te More articles by this author James Kashanian More articles by this author Steven Kaplan More articles by this author Bilal Chughtai More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...