TY - JOUR
T1 - Surgical outcome of anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate
T2 - A systemic review and meta-analysis
AU - Chen, Chih Heng
AU - Chung, Cho Hsing
AU - Chu, Hsin Cheng
AU - Chen, Kuan Chou
AU - Ho, Chen Hsun
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Blackwell Verlag GmbH
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/9/1
Y1 - 2020/9/1
N2 - An increasing number of evidences demonstrate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) using various energy devices. We performed a systemic literature search for all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any EEP technique with TURP or open prostatectomy (OP). A total of 21 RCTs with 2,957 patients were included; the majority were studies of holmium laser or bipolar diathermy. Compared to TURP, EEP resulted in greater improvement in IPSS (MD: −0.56, 95% CI: −0.90 to −0.23), PVR (MD: −2.24, 95% CI: −4.45 to −0.03) and Qmax (MD: −1.07, 95% CI: −1.53 to −0.61). EEP was associated with more prostate tissue removed (MD: −9.73, 95% CI: −15.71 to −3.75), less haemoglobin loss (MD: −0.47, 95% CI: −0.70 to −0.23), shorter catheterisation time (MD: −22.82, 95% CI: −30.11 to −15.52) and shorter length of hospitalisation (MD: −1.05, 95% CI: −1.33 to −0.78). Compared to OP, EEP resulted in equivalent functional outcomes. However, EEP was associated with less haemoglobin loss (MD: −1.17, 95% CI: −1.98 to −0.37), shorter catheterisation time (MD: −89.74, 95% CI: −112.60 to −66.88) and shorter length of hospitalisation (MD: −3.91, 95% CI: −4.63 to −3.60). The current evidence supports that EEP can be considered as a new standard of the surgical management for BPH.
AB - An increasing number of evidences demonstrate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) using various energy devices. We performed a systemic literature search for all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any EEP technique with TURP or open prostatectomy (OP). A total of 21 RCTs with 2,957 patients were included; the majority were studies of holmium laser or bipolar diathermy. Compared to TURP, EEP resulted in greater improvement in IPSS (MD: −0.56, 95% CI: −0.90 to −0.23), PVR (MD: −2.24, 95% CI: −4.45 to −0.03) and Qmax (MD: −1.07, 95% CI: −1.53 to −0.61). EEP was associated with more prostate tissue removed (MD: −9.73, 95% CI: −15.71 to −3.75), less haemoglobin loss (MD: −0.47, 95% CI: −0.70 to −0.23), shorter catheterisation time (MD: −22.82, 95% CI: −30.11 to −15.52) and shorter length of hospitalisation (MD: −1.05, 95% CI: −1.33 to −0.78). Compared to OP, EEP resulted in equivalent functional outcomes. However, EEP was associated with less haemoglobin loss (MD: −1.17, 95% CI: −1.98 to −0.37), shorter catheterisation time (MD: −89.74, 95% CI: −112.60 to −66.88) and shorter length of hospitalisation (MD: −3.91, 95% CI: −4.63 to −3.60). The current evidence supports that EEP can be considered as a new standard of the surgical management for BPH.
KW - bipolar
KW - enucleation
KW - holmium laser
KW - prostate
KW - thulium laser
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85084492683&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85084492683&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/and.13612
DO - 10.1111/and.13612
M3 - Article
C2 - 32400026
AN - SCOPUS:85084492683
SN - 0303-4569
VL - 52
JO - Andrologia
JF - Andrologia
IS - 8
M1 - e13612
ER -