You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP51-11 THE BUTTERFLY TRANSURETHRAL DEVICE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF BPH – OVER 3-YEAR EXPERIENCE AND THE IMPACT OF THE LEARNING CURVE Ran Katz, Muhamad Abu Ahmed, Mahran Kabha, Yoram Dekel, Shmuel Roizman, Amnon Zisman, Jack Baniel, Shachar Aharoni, and Shachar Aharoni Ran KatzRan Katz More articles by this author , Muhamad Abu AhmedMuhamad Abu Ahmed More articles by this author , Mahran KabhaMahran Kabha More articles by this author , Yoram DekelYoram Dekel More articles by this author , Shmuel RoizmanShmuel Roizman More articles by this author , Amnon ZismanAmnon Zisman More articles by this author , Jack BanielJack Baniel More articles by this author , Shachar AharoniShachar Aharoni More articles by this author , and Shachar AharoniShachar Aharoni More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003299.11AboutAbstractPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of the Butterfly device and its effect on LUTS and ejaculation and the impact of the learning curve. METHODS: The study was approved by the Hospital's IRBs. A prospective clinical trial was conducted among 77 men who were treated for at least one year for BPH and were candidates for TURP prior to the intervention. All patients had a Qmax below 13 ml/sec and an IPSS score above 12. The device was inserted through cystoscopy under local anesthesia and sedation. No catheter was left. Follow up assessment was conducted after 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months and then semiannually and included uroflowmetry, IPSS, QoL and sexual questionnaires. Cystoscopy was performed on 3 and 12 months. An analysis of the last 21 consecutive cases was performed and compared to the overall results of the series. RESULTS: Patients' mean age was 68 (50-82). 48 patients completed 1 year follow up with an intact device. The maximal follow-up period was 3.5 years. The average Qmax improvement was 1.4 ml/sec (25%), Average IPSS score decrease was 9.6 points (38.2%), and QoL score improved by 5.1 points (38%). Average PVR decreased by 25.2%. No patient reported deterioration of sexual function and sexually active patients reported antegrade ejaculation. Cystoscopy demonstrated gradual coverage of the device by the prostatic mucosa. Three patients underwent re-positioning of the device. Adverse events were mild, mainly Clavien-Dindo 1-2. One patient developed a bulbar urethral stricture. 24 patients (31%) had their device removed, and 7 of them subsequently underwent TURP. Comparing the last 21 patients in the series, their average age was 68 years, their improvement was identical to the general series yet only 3 devices (14%) were removed and no patient required prostate surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The butterfly device is safe and effective in the management of BPH with good tolerability and a low rate of complications. The gathered experience in this procedure resulted in significant improvement of the clinical outcome of the patients. Source of Funding: Butterfly Medical Ltd. Yoqneam, IL © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e697 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Ran Katz More articles by this author Muhamad Abu Ahmed More articles by this author Mahran Kabha More articles by this author Yoram Dekel More articles by this author Shmuel Roizman More articles by this author Amnon Zisman More articles by this author Jack Baniel More articles by this author Shachar Aharoni More articles by this author Shachar Aharoni More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...