Green LEP vs ThuLEP in Management of Marked Enlarged Prostate
GreenLight (532nm) LASER (XPS) Enucleation vs. Thulium LASER Enucleation of Prostate for Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and open simple prostatectomy (SP) have been the historical reference-standard procedures for prostates < 80 g and ≥ 80 to 100 g, respectively, for years.
Evolution of LASER technology revived the concept of enucleation, so that the resectoscope can be used instead of the surgeon's index finger to separate the adenoma from the surgical capsule mimicking OP. There are several types of laser energy available for enucleation, but the commonest types are Holmium, Greenlight (532nm) and Thulim YAG LASERS.
Thulium: yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser Thulium LASER works at a wavelength between 1940 and 2013 nm in continuous wave mode so it offers advanced vaporization and hemostatic features. Different applications and techniques were developed ranging from vapoenucleation technique with in situ laser assisted resection, so-called Tangerine technique (Thulium Laser resection of the prostate Tangerine Technique "TmLRP-TT"), and enucleation (ThuVEP/ThuLEP are published.
Inspite of paucity of RCT comparing ThuLEP to other standard techniques in management of large prostate, long term outcomes of ThuLEP are so robust. Gross et al reported their 5 year follow up after ThuVEP in 500 patients with median prostate size of 50 grams. They demonstrated durable outcomes, with persistent reductions in I-PSS score (5 vs 21), QoL score (1 vs 4) and improvement in Q max (16.3 vs 6.9 ml/sec). Late complications included urethral stricture in 3.1%, BNC in 3.1% and recurrent adenoma in 0.6%.
Yang et al published their 5 year results of a RCT comparing ThuLEP vs TURis in 159 patients with median prostate size of 70 gm. No statistically significant difference between both groups in terms of IPSS, Qmax or post voiding residual. No patient in either group required retreatment.
In RCT by Feng et al comparing ThuLEP to PKEP ,with 18 months follow up results , the former proved to be efficient and safe within 12 months follow-up interval. However, ThuLEP had significantly better hemostasis parameters and shorter catheterization time.
III GreenLight (532nm) laser system
The Kalium-Titanyl-Phosphate (KTP) and the lithium triborate (LBO) lasers work at a wavelength of 532 nm. Laser energy is absorbed by haemoglobin, but not by water. Vaporisation leads to immediate removal of prostatic tissue, relief of BPO, and reduction of LUTS. GreenLight laser has gained increasing acceptance as a less invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH/ LUTS).
A meta-analysis of the nine available RCTs comparing PVP using the 80-W and 120-W lasers with TURP , no differences were found in Qmax and IPSS between 80-W-PVP and TURP, but only two RCTs provided sufficient 12-month data to be included in the meta-analysis.
With the 180-W (XPS) laser efficacy is comparable to TURP in terms of IPSS, Qmax, post voided residual volume, prostate volume reduction, PSA decrease and QoL questionnaires. The XPS laser prostatectomy is superior to TURP in terms of catheterisation time, lengths of hospital stay and time to stable health status.
In a RCT by Al-Ansari et al comparing HPS 120-W laser PVP versus TURP , the former was associated with dramatic improvements in all urinary outcomes compared to TURP, but reintervention rate for recurrent adenomas was 11 % compared to 1.8% in TURP group. All patients who needed redo surgery had prostate larger than 80 gm.
In another RCT, El-Shal et al of a compared Greenlight laser 180W XPS vapo enucleation , where the adenoma is bluntly enucleated partially then vaporized in situ, and HoLEP and reported 12 months follow up results. Green light XPS vapoenucleation was comparable and non inferior to HoLEP in symptom improvement. However, at 12 months Q max, prostate size reduction and PSA reduction were significantly higher in HoLEP group.
These important findings highlighted some limitations in PVP or vapoenucleation such as the difficulty in determining the anatomical cleavage limits and capsular plain of large adenomas. These drawbacks are not related to the energy source but to the technique used.
Gomez Sancha described different technique to avoid these limitations which was Greenlight LASER En-bloc Enucleation of Prostate (Green LEP) where the whole adenoma is dissected from the surgical capsule and morcellated at the end.
Misrai et al compared Green LEP vs Greenlight PVP for management of prostates larger than 80 gms. At 6 months follow up, IPSS, QoL and PVR improved similarly in both groups but Q max was significantly higher in Green LEP group. Median percent reduction in prostate size as measured by TRUS was significantly higher in green LEP (74% vs 57%). Median % reduction of PSA was 40% and 67% in PVP and Green LEP respectively (p<0.0001).
There is a paucity in studies comparing different types of EEP using different energy sources other than holmium laser.
Aim of the work In this study the investigators aim to test Thulium Laser 200 W Enucleation of the Prostate (ThuLEP) vs Greenlight (532-nm) laser Photoselective Enucleation of the Prostate (Green LEP) using (XPS) 180W system in reduction of LUTS secondary to BPH in a randomized controlled trial. Furthermore, all peri-operative parameters, urinary flow parameters, prostate size changes and complications associated with the procedures will be compared.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Mahmoud Nabil Laymon, MD
- Phone Number: 00201002275698
- Email: dr_mahmoudlaymon@yahoo.com
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Adel M Nabeeh, Professor
- Phone Number: 0020100196665
- Email: adel_nabeeh51@hotmail.com
Study Locations
-
-
Dakahlia
-
Mansoura, Dakahlia, Egypt
- Recruiting
- Urology and nephrology center
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients' age ≥ 40 years
- LUTS secondary to BOO due to BPH who failed medical treatment
- International prostate symptom scores (IPSS) >15 and bother score (QOL) ≥ 3 (according to IPSS question 8)
- Peak urinary flow rate (Qmax) <15 ml/sec with at least 125 ml voided volume or Patients with acute urine retention secondary to BPH who failed trial of voiding on medical treatment.
- ASA (American society of anaesthesiologists) score ≤3.
- TRUS prostate size > /= 80 ml
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patient with neurological disorder which might affect bladder function as cerebrovascular stroke, Parkinson disease
- Active urinary tract infection,
- Presence of active bladder cancer (within the last 2 years)
- Known prostate cancer patients will be excluded preoperatively on the basis of digital rectal examination, prostate specific antigen level, and TRUS imaging followed by prostate biopsies if necessary.
- Patient has a disorder of the coagulation cascade (e.g., liver cell failure) or disorders that affect platelet count or function (e.g., von Willebrand disease) that would put the subject at risk for intraoperative or postoperative bleeding.
- Patient is unable to discontinue anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy preoperatively (3-5 d) except for low-dose aspirin (e.g., 100 mg).
- Patient has had an acute myocardial infarction or open-heart surgery <180 days prior to the date of informed consent.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: ThuLEP
Thulium laser enucleation of prostate
|
Thulium laser enucleation of prostate
|
|
Experimental: Green LEP
Greenlight laser enucleation of prostate
|
Greenlight laser enucleation of prostate
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
voiding and storage symptoms improvement
Time Frame: 6 months
|
International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS)
|
6 months
|
|
sexual function changes
Time Frame: 6 months
|
International Index of Erectile Function Questionnaire (IIEF)
|
6 months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Operative time
Time Frame: 6 months
|
in minutes
|
6 months
|
|
Postoperative complication
Time Frame: 12 months
|
Clavien-Dindo classification for post-operative complications
|
12 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- MD/17.02.26
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Prostatic Hyperplasia With Urinary Obstruction
-
NCT07552961Not yet recruitingBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia | Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms | Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Outflow Obstruction
-
NCT07410390Not yet recruitingBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Outflow Obstruction
-
NCT03589196UnknownProstatic Hyperplasia | Prostate Disease | BPH With Urinary Obstruction | Prostate Obstruction | Ejaculation Abnormal
-
NCT06983444RecruitingBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms | Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Symptomatic Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms | Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) Requiring Surgical Resection | Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Outflow Obstruction
-
NCT02977832CompletedBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia | Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy With Outflow Obstruction
-
NCT04781049CompletedBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia | Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy | Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy With Outflow Obstruction | Prostate Hyperplasia
-
NCT03503721UnknownBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia | Bladder Outlet Obstruction
-
NCT03776006Not yet recruitingLower Urinary Tract Symptoms | Benign Prostate Hyperplasia | Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy With Outflow Obstruction
-
NCT06265519RecruitingLower Urinary Tract Obstructive Syndrome | Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Outflow Obstruction
-
NCT01436877CompletedBenign Prostate Hyperplasia | Bladder Neck Obstruction
Clinical Trials on ThuLEP
-
NCT05494944CompletedBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia
-
NCT03916536CompletedProstate Hypertrophy | Holmium Laser | Thulium Laser | Bipolar Diathermy | Prostate Enucleation
-
NCT07565961RecruitingBPH (Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia)
-
NCT03230721CompletedLower Urinary Tract Symptoms | Prostatic Hyperplasia, Benign | Prostate Adenoma
-
NCT07603011RecruitingUrinary Retention | Benign Prostate Obstruction (BPO)
-
NCT07569874RecruitingBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia | Bladder Outlet Obstruction | Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS)