{"title":"Rezum水蒸汽疗法和尿举术治疗良性前列腺增生的持久性比较:多中心倾向评分匹配分析。","authors":"Chye-Yang Lim, Chih-Cheng Lai, Ya-Wen Tsai","doi":"10.7759/cureus.80914","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift are among the minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs) gaining popularity in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). This study aims to evaluate and compare the reintervention rates, a measure of durability, for Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift as MISTs for BPH. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, a large database of electronic health records from January 2014 to June 2024. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision codes (ICD-10) were used to build the cohorts of men aged over 18 years who underwent either Rezum water vapor therapy or UroLift. Reintervention rates and complication profiles were evaluated over a follow-up period of up to five years. Results Cumulative reintervention rates were collected for both Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift at the 1st, 3rd, and 5th years (2.83% vs. 3.59%, 5.99% vs. 8.76%, 6.81% vs. 10.85%). The average annual increase rate was 1% for Rezum water vapor therapy compared with 1.82% for UroLift, respectively. Most complications were more prominent in the Rezum water vapor therapy group, with urinary retention accounting for 23.42%. Discussion Rezum water vapor therapy demonstrates a more durable effect with lower reintervention rates compared to UroLift, based on this large multicenter cohort study. The higher reintervention rate observed with UroLift may reflect differences in the mechanisms of action between the two procedures. Conclusions These findings elucidate the superiority of Rezum water vapor therapy in sustaining the therapeutic effect over the long term compared to UroLift. However, more complications were noted in the Rezum water vapor therapy group. Thus, clinicians should take into account the durability and complication profiles in shared decision-making when considering MISTs for BPH.</p>","PeriodicalId":93960,"journal":{"name":"Cureus","volume":"17 3","pages":"e80914"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11927518/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Durability Between Rezum Water Vapor Therapy and UroLift in Treating Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Chye-Yang Lim, Chih-Cheng Lai, Ya-Wen Tsai\",\"doi\":\"10.7759/cureus.80914\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Background Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift are among the minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs) gaining popularity in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). This study aims to evaluate and compare the reintervention rates, a measure of durability, for Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift as MISTs for BPH. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, a large database of electronic health records from January 2014 to June 2024. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision codes (ICD-10) were used to build the cohorts of men aged over 18 years who underwent either Rezum water vapor therapy or UroLift. Reintervention rates and complication profiles were evaluated over a follow-up period of up to five years. Results Cumulative reintervention rates were collected for both Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift at the 1st, 3rd, and 5th years (2.83% vs. 3.59%, 5.99% vs. 8.76%, 6.81% vs. 10.85%). The average annual increase rate was 1% for Rezum water vapor therapy compared with 1.82% for UroLift, respectively. Most complications were more prominent in the Rezum water vapor therapy group, with urinary retention accounting for 23.42%. Discussion Rezum water vapor therapy demonstrates a more durable effect with lower reintervention rates compared to UroLift, based on this large multicenter cohort study. The higher reintervention rate observed with UroLift may reflect differences in the mechanisms of action between the two procedures. Conclusions These findings elucidate the superiority of Rezum water vapor therapy in sustaining the therapeutic effect over the long term compared to UroLift. However, more complications were noted in the Rezum water vapor therapy group. Thus, clinicians should take into account the durability and complication profiles in shared decision-making when considering MISTs for BPH.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93960,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cureus\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"e80914\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11927518/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cureus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.80914\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cureus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.80914","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景Rezum水蒸汽疗法和UroLift是在治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)中越来越受欢迎的微创手术疗法(mist)。本研究旨在评估和比较Rezum水蒸气疗法和UroLift作为雾剂治疗BPH的再干预率,这是一种衡量持久性的指标。方法采用2014年1月至2024年6月来自TriNetX全球协作网络(一个大型电子健康记录数据库)的数据进行回顾性队列研究。使用现行程序术语(CPT)和国际疾病分类第十次修订代码(ICD-10)建立年龄在18岁以上接受Rezum水蒸气疗法或UroLift的男性队列。在长达5年的随访期间,评估了再干预率和并发症概况。结果收集了Rezum水蒸气疗法和UroLift在第1、3、5年的累计再干预率(2.83% vs. 3.59%, 5.99% vs. 8.76%, 6.81% vs. 10.85%)。Rezum水蒸汽疗法的平均年增长率为1%,而UroLift的平均年增长率为1.82%。Rezum水蒸汽治疗组并发症最为突出,尿潴留占23.42%。根据这项大型多中心队列研究,与UroLift相比,Rezum水蒸气疗法的效果更持久,再干预率更低。在UroLift手术中观察到的较高的再干预率可能反映了两种手术之间作用机制的差异。结论与UroLift相比,Rezum水蒸汽疗法在长期维持治疗效果方面具有优势。然而,Rezum水蒸气治疗组出现了更多的并发症。因此,临床医生在考虑BPH的mist时,应考虑到共同决策的持久性和并发症。
Comparison of Durability Between Rezum Water Vapor Therapy and UroLift in Treating Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.
Background Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift are among the minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs) gaining popularity in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). This study aims to evaluate and compare the reintervention rates, a measure of durability, for Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift as MISTs for BPH. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, a large database of electronic health records from January 2014 to June 2024. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision codes (ICD-10) were used to build the cohorts of men aged over 18 years who underwent either Rezum water vapor therapy or UroLift. Reintervention rates and complication profiles were evaluated over a follow-up period of up to five years. Results Cumulative reintervention rates were collected for both Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift at the 1st, 3rd, and 5th years (2.83% vs. 3.59%, 5.99% vs. 8.76%, 6.81% vs. 10.85%). The average annual increase rate was 1% for Rezum water vapor therapy compared with 1.82% for UroLift, respectively. Most complications were more prominent in the Rezum water vapor therapy group, with urinary retention accounting for 23.42%. Discussion Rezum water vapor therapy demonstrates a more durable effect with lower reintervention rates compared to UroLift, based on this large multicenter cohort study. The higher reintervention rate observed with UroLift may reflect differences in the mechanisms of action between the two procedures. Conclusions These findings elucidate the superiority of Rezum water vapor therapy in sustaining the therapeutic effect over the long term compared to UroLift. However, more complications were noted in the Rezum water vapor therapy group. Thus, clinicians should take into account the durability and complication profiles in shared decision-making when considering MISTs for BPH.