Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate vs single-port transvesical enucleation of the prostate: Single-center comparative surgical outcomes during early adoption.

IF 1.9 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Central European Journal of Urology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-25 DOI:10.5173/ceju.2025.0060
Arianna Biasatti, Angelo Orsini, Oren Feldman-Schultz, Kyle A Dymanus, Morgan R Sturgis, Fabio Maria Valenzi, Srinivas Vourganti, Riccardo Autorino, Shaan A Setia
{"title":"Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate vs single-port transvesical enucleation of the prostate: Single-center comparative surgical outcomes during early adoption.","authors":"Arianna Biasatti, Angelo Orsini, Oren Feldman-Schultz, Kyle A Dymanus, Morgan R Sturgis, Fabio Maria Valenzi, Srinivas Vourganti, Riccardo Autorino, Shaan A Setia","doi":"10.5173/ceju.2025.0060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To compare the surgical outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and robotic single-port transvesical enucleation of the prostate (STEP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) during early adoption at a single center.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Data about consecutive BPH patients who underwent HoLEP and STEP at our Center from July 2023 to September 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Both procedures were performed by surgeons at the beginning of their experience with the procedures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty HoLEP and 20 STEP cases were included in the analysis. STEP patients had larger prostate volume (median 101.5 vs 78.5 cc; p = 0.003). Median operative time was longer for STEP (286 vs 124 min, p <0.001). Median catheterization time was shorter for HoLEP (3 vs 7 days, p <0.001). Transient post-operative incontinence was higher for HoLEP (31% vs 5.3%, p = 0.032). There was no difference in median length of stay (30 hours for HoLEP and 31 hours for STEP; p = 0.108).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both HoLEP and STEP can be safely implemented for the minimally invasive treatment of BPH. Each of the procedures presents some appealing features that can be tailored to different subgroups of patients. HoLEP is appealing for higher surgical risk patients, while STEP allows to effectively manage larger glands even at the beginning of the surgeon's learning curve. As experience with SP robotic surgery matures, it is likely that STEP becomes a competitive alternative to the well-established HoLEP.</p>","PeriodicalId":9744,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Urology","volume":"78 2","pages":"177-180"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12379826/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central European Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2025.0060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: To compare the surgical outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and robotic single-port transvesical enucleation of the prostate (STEP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) during early adoption at a single center.

Material and methods: Data about consecutive BPH patients who underwent HoLEP and STEP at our Center from July 2023 to September 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Both procedures were performed by surgeons at the beginning of their experience with the procedures.

Results: Thirty HoLEP and 20 STEP cases were included in the analysis. STEP patients had larger prostate volume (median 101.5 vs 78.5 cc; p = 0.003). Median operative time was longer for STEP (286 vs 124 min, p <0.001). Median catheterization time was shorter for HoLEP (3 vs 7 days, p <0.001). Transient post-operative incontinence was higher for HoLEP (31% vs 5.3%, p = 0.032). There was no difference in median length of stay (30 hours for HoLEP and 31 hours for STEP; p = 0.108).

Conclusions: Both HoLEP and STEP can be safely implemented for the minimally invasive treatment of BPH. Each of the procedures presents some appealing features that can be tailored to different subgroups of patients. HoLEP is appealing for higher surgical risk patients, while STEP allows to effectively manage larger glands even at the beginning of the surgeon's learning curve. As experience with SP robotic surgery matures, it is likely that STEP becomes a competitive alternative to the well-established HoLEP.

钬激光前列腺摘除与单孔经膀胱前列腺摘除:早期采用的单中心比较手术结果
前言:比较钬激光前列腺摘除(HoLEP)和机器人单孔经膀胱前列腺摘除(STEP)治疗早期良性前列腺增生(BPH)的手术效果。材料与方法:回顾性分析2023年7月至2024年9月在我中心连续行HoLEP和STEP治疗的BPH患者的资料。这两种手术都是由外科医生在他们的手术经验开始时进行的。结果:30例HoLEP和20例STEP纳入分析。STEP患者前列腺体积较大(中位数为101.5比78.5 cc; p = 0.003)。STEP的中位手术时间更长(286分钟vs 124分钟),p结论:HoLEP和STEP都可以安全地用于BPH的微创治疗。每一种手术都有一些吸引人的特点,可以针对不同的亚组患者进行定制。HoLEP对手术风险较高的患者有吸引力,而STEP允许在外科医生学习曲线的开始有效地管理较大的腺体。随着SP机器人手术经验的成熟,STEP很可能成为成熟的HoLEP的竞争替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Central European Journal of Urology
Central European Journal of Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信