Yu Xi Terence Law, Wei Jing Kelven Chen, Liang Shen, Kyaw Lin, Chloe Shu Hui Ong, Qi Yang Lim, Gregory Xiang Wen Pek, Woon Chau Tsang, Yi Quan Tan, Jun Yang Chia, King Chien Joe Lee, Wei Jin Chua
{"title":"Convective Water Vapor Energy Ablation (Rezum<sup>®</sup>) Versus Prostatic Urethral Lift (Urolift<sup>®</sup>): A 2-Year Prospective Study.","authors":"Yu Xi Terence Law, Wei Jing Kelven Chen, Liang Shen, Kyaw Lin, Chloe Shu Hui Ong, Qi Yang Lim, Gregory Xiang Wen Pek, Woon Chau Tsang, Yi Quan Tan, Jun Yang Chia, King Chien Joe Lee, Wei Jin Chua","doi":"10.1089/end.2024.0400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> To compare the clinical outcomes and complication rates of convective water vapor energy ablation (Rezum<sup>®</sup>) and prostatic urethral lift (Urolift<sup>®</sup>). To identify predictive factors for treatment failures in both treatments. <b><i>Materials & Methods:</i></b> Prospective clinico-epidemiological data of patients who underwent Urolift<sup>®</sup> or Rezum<sup>®</sup> in a single institution for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) was collected. The choice of intervention depended on the preference of the patients after patient-centric discussions. <b><i>Results:</i></b> From October 2019 to October 2022, 86 patients underwent Rezum<sup>®</sup>, and 62 patients underwent Urolift<sup>®</sup>. Rezum<sup>®</sup> involved a longer indwelling catheter duration (12.38 ± 5.548 <i>vs</i> 1.39 ± 3.010 days, <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared with Urolift<sup>®</sup>. Rezum<sup>®</sup> was associated with more complications compared with Urolift<sup>®</sup> (36 [41.9%] <i>vs</i> 10 [16.1%] cases, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Rezum<sup>®</sup> had more cases of hematuria (17 [19.8%] <i>vs</i> 4 [6.5%] cases [<i>p</i> = 0.022]) and urinary tract infections (27 [31.4%] <i>vs</i> 3 [4.8%] cases, <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared with Urolift<sup>®</sup>. There were no significant differences in Clavien-Dindo Grade 3-5 complications between the interventions. Urolift<sup>®</sup> was associated with higher reoperation rates (5 [8.1%] <i>vs</i> 0 [0%] cases, <i>p</i> = 0.010) compared Rezum<sup>®</sup>. Rezum<sup>®</sup> had higher anticholinergic usage rates compared with Urolift<sup>®</sup> post-operation (22 [25.6%] <i>vs</i> 8 [12.9%] cases, <i>p</i> = 0.024). Both interventions showed improvement in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life score, and peak velocity flow over the 2 years with no significant difference between the two. Based on receiver operating characteristic curve, preoperation IPSS ≥16 had 95.7% sensitivity and 38.4% specificity to predict the probability of treatment failures after the interventions. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> There was no difference in clinical outcomes of patients who underwent Rezum<sup>®</sup> and Urolift<sup>®</sup>. However, patients who had undergone Rezum<sup>®</sup> faced more minor complications and more required anti-cholinergic medications. Lastly, physicians should note that patients with IPSS ≥16 would unlikely benefit from either intervention.</p>","PeriodicalId":15723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endourology","volume":" ","pages":"1387-1394"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endourology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2024.0400","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: To compare the clinical outcomes and complication rates of convective water vapor energy ablation (Rezum®) and prostatic urethral lift (Urolift®). To identify predictive factors for treatment failures in both treatments. Materials & Methods: Prospective clinico-epidemiological data of patients who underwent Urolift® or Rezum® in a single institution for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) was collected. The choice of intervention depended on the preference of the patients after patient-centric discussions. Results: From October 2019 to October 2022, 86 patients underwent Rezum®, and 62 patients underwent Urolift®. Rezum® involved a longer indwelling catheter duration (12.38 ± 5.548 vs 1.39 ± 3.010 days, p < 0.001) compared with Urolift®. Rezum® was associated with more complications compared with Urolift® (36 [41.9%] vs 10 [16.1%] cases, p < 0.001). Rezum® had more cases of hematuria (17 [19.8%] vs 4 [6.5%] cases [p = 0.022]) and urinary tract infections (27 [31.4%] vs 3 [4.8%] cases, p < 0.001) compared with Urolift®. There were no significant differences in Clavien-Dindo Grade 3-5 complications between the interventions. Urolift® was associated with higher reoperation rates (5 [8.1%] vs 0 [0%] cases, p = 0.010) compared Rezum®. Rezum® had higher anticholinergic usage rates compared with Urolift® post-operation (22 [25.6%] vs 8 [12.9%] cases, p = 0.024). Both interventions showed improvement in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life score, and peak velocity flow over the 2 years with no significant difference between the two. Based on receiver operating characteristic curve, preoperation IPSS ≥16 had 95.7% sensitivity and 38.4% specificity to predict the probability of treatment failures after the interventions. Conclusions: There was no difference in clinical outcomes of patients who underwent Rezum® and Urolift®. However, patients who had undergone Rezum® faced more minor complications and more required anti-cholinergic medications. Lastly, physicians should note that patients with IPSS ≥16 would unlikely benefit from either intervention.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Endourology, JE Case Reports, and Videourology are the leading peer-reviewed journal, case reports publication, and innovative videojournal companion covering all aspects of minimally invasive urology research, applications, and clinical outcomes.
The leading journal of minimally invasive urology for over 30 years, Journal of Endourology is the essential publication for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest surgical technologies in endoscopic, laparoscopic, robotic, and image-guided procedures as they apply to benign and malignant diseases of the genitourinary tract. This flagship journal includes the companion videojournal Videourology™ with every subscription. While Journal of Endourology remains focused on publishing rigorously peer reviewed articles, Videourology accepts original videos containing material that has not been reported elsewhere, except in the form of an abstract or a conference presentation.
Journal of Endourology coverage includes:
The latest laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic, and image-guided techniques for treating both benign and malignant conditions
Pioneering research articles
Controversial cases in endourology
Techniques in endourology with accompanying videos
Reviews and epochs in endourology
Endourology survey section of endourology relevant manuscripts published in other journals.