Systematic review and meta-analysis of Transurethral Needle Ablation in symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Carmen Bouza, Teresa López, Angeles Magro, Lourdes Navalpotro, José María Amate, Carmen Bouza, Teresa López, Angeles Magro, Lourdes Navalpotro, José María Amate

Abstract

Background: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) constitutes a major clinical problem. Minimally invasive therapies for the treatment of symptomatic BPH include Transurethral Needle Ablation (TUNA), but it is unclear what impact this technique has on the disease and its role among other currently available therapeutic options. The objective of this study is to ascertain the efficacy and safety of TUNA in the treatment of BPH.

Methods: Systematic review of the literature until January 2005 and meta-analysis of clinical studies assessing TUNA in symptomatic BPH. Studies were critically appraised. Estimates of effect were calculated according to the random-effects model.

Results: 35 studies (9 comparative, 26 non-comparative) were included. Although evidence was limited by methodological issues, the analysis of relevant outcomes indicates that while TUNA significantly improves BPH parameters with respect to baseline, it does not reach the same level of efficacy as TURP in respect to all subjective and objective variables. Further, its efficacy declines in the long-term with a rate of secondary-treatment significantly higher than of TURP [OR: 7.44 (2.47, 22.43)]. Conversely, TUNA seems to be a relatively safe technique and shows a lower rate of complications than TURP [OR:0.14 (0.05, 0.14)] with differences being particularly noteworthy in terms of postoperative bleeding and sexual disorders. Likewise, TUNA has fewer anesthetic requirements and generates a shorter hospital stay than TURP [WMD: -1.9 days (-2.75, -1.05)]. Scarce data and lack of replication of comparisons hinder the assessment of TUNA vs. other local therapies. No comparisons with medical treatment were found.

Conclusion: The body of evidence on which TUNA has been introduced into clinical practice is of only moderate-low quality. Available evidence suggest that TUNA is a relatively effective and safe technique that may eventually prove to have a role in selected patients with symptomatic BPH. TUNA significantly improves BPH parameters with respect to baseline values, but it does not reach the same level of efficacy and long-lasting success as TURP. On the other hand, TUNA seems to be superior to TURP in terms of associated morbidity, anesthetic requirements and length of hospital stay. With respect to the role of TUNA vis-à-vis other minimally invasive therapies, the results of this review indicate that there are insufficient data to define this with any degree of accuracy. Overall cost-effectiveness and the role of TUNA versus medical treatment need further evaluation.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
TUNA. Non-comparative studies. Rate of secondary interventions. Random effects model.
Figure 2
Figure 2
TUNA vs. TURP. Need for new therapeutic interventions. Random effects model. CI denotes confidence interval Chi-squared heterogeneity = 0.70 (d.f. = 4), P = .951. Overall effect P value = .000.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Studies that compare TUNA and TURP. Adverse effects. Results of meta-analysis. Random effects model. CI denotes confidence interval.

References

    1. Barry MJ, Roehrborn CG. Clinical evidence: Benign prostatic hyperplasia. BMJ. 2001;323:1041–1046.
    1. AUA Practice Guidelines Committee. AUA guideline on the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol. 2003;170:530–547. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000078083.38675.79.
    1. Wei JT, Calhoun E, Jacobsen S. Urologic diseases in America Project: Benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2005;173:1256–1261. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000155709.37840.fe.
    1. Verhamme KMC, Dieleman JP, Bleumink GS, van der Lei J, Sturkenboom MC, Artibani W, Begaud B, Berges R, Borkowski A, Chappel CR, Costello A, Dobronski P, Farmer RD, Jimenez Cruz F, Jonas U, MacRae K, Pientka L, Rutten FF, van Schayck CP, Speakman MJ, Sturkenboom MC, Tiellac P, Tubaro A, Vallencien G, Vela Navarrete R. Triumph Pan European Expert Panel. Incidence and prevalence of lower urinary symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia in primary care- The Triumph project. Eur Urol. 2002;42:323–328. doi: 10.1016/S0302-2838(02)00354-8.
    1. Elixhauser A, Steiner CA. Most common diagnoses and procedures in U.S. community hospitals. HCUP research note. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Rockville, MD.
    1. de la Rossette JJMCH, Alivizatos G, Madersbacher S, Perachino M, Thomas D, Desgranchamps F, de Wildt M. Guidelines on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Eur Urol. 2001;40:256–263. doi: 10.1159/000049784.
    1. Naderi N, Mochtar CA, De la Rossette JJMCH. Real life practice in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Curr Opi Urol. 2004;14:41–44. doi: 10.1097/00042307-200401000-00009.
    1. Bryan NP, Byrne L, Hastie KJ, Anderson JB, Moore KT, Chapple CR. A pilot study for a randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of surgical treatments of the prostate. BJU Int. 1999;83:249–253. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00918.x.
    1. Puppo P. Long-term effects on BPH of medical and instrumental therapies. Eur Urol. 2001:2–6. doi: 10.1159/000052592.
    1. Schulman CC, Zlotta AR, Rasor JS, Hourriez L, Noel JC, Edwards SD. Transurethral needle ablation (TUNA): safety, feasibility and tolerance of a new office procedure for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol. 1993;24:415–423.
    1. FDA. 510(k) Summary of Safety and Effectiveness-VIDAMED TUNA (Transurethral Needle Ablation) System
    1. Braun M, Mathers M, Bondarenko B, Engelmann U. Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia through Transurethral Needle Ablation (TUNA) Urol Int. 2004;72:32–39. doi: 10.1159/000075270.
    1. Boyle P, Robertson C, Vaughan ED, Fitzpatrick JM. A meta-analysis of trials of transurethral needle ablation for treating symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int. 2004;94:83–88. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.04906.x.
    1. de la Rossette JJMCH, van der Schoot DKE, Debruyne FMJ. Recent developments in guidelines on benign prostatic hyperplasia. Curr Opi Urol. 2002;12:3–6. doi: 10.1097/00042307-200201000-00002.
    1. Wheelahan J, Scott NA, Cartmill R, Marshall V, Morton RP, Nacey J, Maddern GJ. Minimally invasive non-laser thermal therapy for prostatectomy: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2000;86:977–988. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2000.00976.x.
    1. Medical Services Advisory Committee. Department of Health and Ageing. Application 1014. TransUrethral needle Ablation (TUNA) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. 2002.
    1. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. International procedure overview of Transurethral radiofrequency needle ablation of the prostate International Procedure Guidance 15 UK : NICE. 2003.
    1. Naspro R, Salonia A, Colombo R, Cestari A, Guazzoni G, Rigattti P, Montorsi F. Update of the minimally invasive therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Curr Opin Urol. 2005;15:49–53. doi: 10.1097/00042307-200501000-00012.
    1. Khan KS, Ter Riet G, Glanville J, Sowden AJ, Kleijnen J, Eds . Undertaking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effectiveness: CRD's Guidance for Carrying Out or Commissioning Reviews Report 4 – 2nd ed. York, UK: NHS Centre for Reviews & Dissemination. University of York; 2001.
    1. Royle P, Waugh N. Literature searching for clinical and cost-effectiveness studies used in health technology assessments reports carried out for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence appraisal system. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7:1–51.
    1. Concato J, Shah I, Horwitz R. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1887–1892. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200006223422507.
    1. Sackett DL, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Hayes RB. Evidence-Based Medicine How to Practice and Teach EBM. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1997.
    1. Gavaghan DJ, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. An evaluation of homogeneity tests in meta-analyses in pain using simulations of individual patient data. Pain. 2000;85:415–424. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00302-4.
    1. Schwartz D. Méthodes statistiques à l'usage des médecins et des biologistes. Paris Flammarion Médecine-Science; 1981.
    1. Schulman C, Zlotta A. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate (TUNA): pathological, radiological and clinical study of a new office procedure for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia using low-level radiofrequency energy. Arch Esp Urol. 1994;47:895–901.
    1. Harewood LM, Cleeve LK, O'Connell HE, Pope AJ, Vaughan MG, Agarwal D. Transurethral Needle Ablation of the prostate (TUNA): clinical results and ultrasound, endoscopic, and histologic findings in pilot study of patients in urinary retention. J Endourol. 1995;9:407–412.
    1. Heaton JP. Radiofrequency thermal ablation of the prostate: the TUNA technique. Tech Urol. 1995;1:3–10.
    1. Schulman CC, Zlotta AR. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: early clinical experience. Urology. 1995;45:28–33. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(95)96260-3.
    1. Issa MM. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate: report of initial United States clinical trial. J Urol. 1996;156:413–419. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)65863-4.
    1. Millard RJ, Harewood LM, Tamaddon K. A study of the efficacy and safety of transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Neurourol Urodyn. 1996;15:619–628. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6777(1996)15:6<619::AID-NAU3>;2-I.
    1. Zlotta AR, Peny MO, Matos C, Schulman CC. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate: clinical experience in patients in urinary acute retention. B J Urol. 1996;77:391–397.
    1. Campo B, Bergamaschi F, Corrada P, Ordesi G. Transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) of the prostate: a clinical and urodynamic evaluation. Urology. 1997;49:847–850. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00155-6.
    1. Ramon J, Lynch TH, Eardley I, Ekman P, Frick J, Jungwirth A, Pillai M, Wiklund P, Goldwasser B, Fitzpatrick JM. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a collaborative multicentre study. Br J Urol. 1997;80:128–134.
    1. Rodrigo-Aliaga M, Lopez-Alcina E, Monserrat-Monfort JJ, Pontones-Moreno JL, Valls-Blasco F, Boronat-Tormo F, Jimenez-Cruz JF. Tratamiento de la hiperplasia benigna de prostata mediante ablacion termica transuretral con aguja (TUNA). [Treatment of benign hyperplasia of the prostate using thermal transurethral needle ablation (TUNA)] Actas Urol Esp. 1997;21:649–654.
    1. Rosario DJ, Woo H, Potts KL, Cutinha PE, Hastie KJ, Chapple CR. Safety and efficacy of transurethral needle ablation of the prostate for symptomatic outlet obstruction. Br J Urol. 1997;80:579–586.
    1. Steele GS, Sleep DJ. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate: a urodynamic based study with 2-year follow up. J Urol . 1997;158:1834–1838. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)64140-5.
    1. Braun M, Zumbe J, Korte D, Solleder G, Heidenreich A, Engelmann U. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate: an alternative minimally invasive therapeutic concept in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia. Urol Int. 1998;61:104–110. doi: 10.1159/000030298.
    1. Kahn SA, Alphonse P, Tewari A, Narayan P. An open study on the efficacy and safety of transurethral needle ablation of the prostate in treating symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: the University of Florida experience. J Urol. 1998;160:1695–1700. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)62385-1.
    1. Roehrborn CGR, Shumaker BP, Narayan P. Transurethral needle ablation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: 12-month results of a prospective, multicenter U.S. study. Urology . 1998;51:415–421. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00682-1.
    1. Elterman L, Ekbal S. An open prospective study of safety and efficacy of transurethral needle ablation in patients with trilobar benign prostatic hyperplasia [abstract] J Urol. 1999;161:s304. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199904020-00218.
    1. Holmes MA, Stewart J, Boulton JB, Chambers RM. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate: outcome at 1 year. J Endourol. 1999;13:745–750.
    1. Namasivayam S, Eardley I, Bryan NP, Hastie KJ, Chapple CR. 3 year prospective follow-up of 91 men treated with transurethral needle ablation of prostate(TUNA) [abstract] J Urol. 1999;161:s390. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199904020-00561.
    1. Namiki K, Shiozawa H, Tsuzuki M, Mamiya Y, Matsumoto T, Miki M. Efficacy of transurethral needle ablation of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia. Int J Urol. 1999;6:341–345. doi: 10.1046/j.1442-2042.1999.00073.x.
    1. Bergamaschi F, Manzo M, Auteri G, Corrada P, Campo B. Five years experience using transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) in 204 BPH patients [abstract] J Urol. 2000;163:s334.
    1. Naslund MJ, Benson RC, Cohen ES, Gutierrez-Aceves J, Issa MM. Transurethral Needle Ablation for BPH in patients with median lobe enlargement-report of a prospective multi-center study [abstract] J Urol. 2000;163:s270.
    1. Murai M, Tachibana M, Miki M, Shiozawa H, Hirao Y, Okajima E. Transurethral needle ablation of the prostate: an initial Japanese clinical trial. Int J Urol. 2001;8:99–105. doi: 10.1046/j.1442-2042.2001.00260.x.
    1. Daehlin L, Gustavsen A, Nilsen AH, Mohn J. Transurethral needle ablation for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: outcome after 1 year. J Endourol. 2002;16:111–115. doi: 10.1089/089277902753619636.
    1. Fujimoto K, Hosokawa Y, Tomioka A, Yamamoto H, Tanaka Y, Otani T, Ozono S, Hirao Y, Hayashi Y. Variations of transition zone volume and transition zone index after transurethral needle ablation for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Int J Urol. 2003;10:392–397. doi: 10.1046/j.1442-2042.2003.00648.x.
    1. Zlotta AR, Giannakopoulos X, Maehlum O, Ostrem T, Schulman CC. Long-term evaluation of transurethral needle ablation of the prostate (TUNA) for treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: clinical outcome up to five years from three centers. Eur Urol. 2003;44:89–93. doi: 10.1016/S0302-2838(03)00218-5.
    1. Bruskewitz R, Issa MM, Roehrborn CG, Naslund MJ, Perez-Marrero R, Shumaker BP, Oesterling JE. A prospective, randomized 1-year clinical trial comparing transurethral needle ablation to transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 1998;159:1588–1593. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199805000-00048.
    1. Roehrborn CG, Burkhard FC, Bruskewitz RC, Issa MM, Perez-Marrero R, Naslund MJ, Shumaker BP. The effects of transurethral needle ablation and resection of the prostate on pressure flow urodynamic parameters: analysis of the United States randomized study. J Urol. 1999;162:92–97. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199907000-00023.
    1. Chandrasekar P, Virdi JS, Kapasi F. Transurethral Needle Ablation of the prostate (TUNA) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia; a prospective, randomized study, long term results [abstract] J Urol. 2003;169:s468.
    1. Cimentepe E, Unsal A, Saglam R. Randomized clinical trial comparing transurethral needle ablation with transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: results at 18 months. J Endourol. 2003;17:103–107. doi: 10.1089/08927790360587432.
    1. Hill B, Belville W, Bruskewitz R, Issa M, Perez Marrero R, Roehrborn C, Terris M, Naslund M. Transurethral Needle Ablation versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: 5-year results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial. J Urol. 2004;171:2336–2340. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000127761.87421.a0.
    1. Schatzl G, Madersbacher S, Lang T, Marberger M. The early postoperative morbidity of Transurethral resection of the prostate and of 4 minimally invasive treatment alternatives. J Urol. 1997;158:105–111. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199707000-00029.
    1. Arai Y, Aoki Y, Okubo K, Maeda H, Terada N, Matsuta Y, Maekawa S, Ogura K. Impact of interventional therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia on quality of life and sexual function: a prospective study. J Urol. 2000;164:1206–1211. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67142-X.
    1. Schatzl G, Madersbacher S, Djavan B, Lang T, Marberger M. Two-year results of transurethral resection of the prostate versus four 'less invasive' treatment options. Eur Urol. 2000;37:695–701. doi: 10.1159/000020220.
    1. Minardi D, Galosi BA, Yehia M, Cristalli A, Hanitzsch H, Polito M, Muzzonigro G. Transurethral Resection versus minimally invasive treatments of benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of treatments. Our experience. Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia. 2004;76:11–18.
    1. Roos NP, Wennenberg JE, Malenka DJ, Fisher ES, McPherson K, Andersen TF, Cohen MM, Ramsey E. Mortality and reoperation after open and transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med. 1989;320:1120–1124.
    1. Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gibody S, Duley L, Sutton AJ. Publication and related biases. Health Technology Assessment. 2000;4:1–105.
    1. Ferguson D, Laupacis A, Salmi LR, McAlister FA, Huet C. What should be included in meta-analysis?. An exploration of methodological issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:1109–1119. doi: 10.1017/S0266462300103150.
    1. Tang J, Liu JL. Misleading funnel plot for detection of bias in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:477–484. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00204-8.
    1. Stein K, Dalziel K, Garside R, Castelnuovo E, Round A. Association between methodological characteristics and outcome in health technology assessments which included case series. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:277–287.
    1. McCulloch P, Taylor I, Sasako M, Lovett B, Griffin D. Randomised trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ. 2002;324:1448–1451. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1448.
    1. Hartling L, McAlister FA, Rowe BH, Ezekowitz J, Friesen C, Klassen TP. Challenges in Systematic Reviews of Therapeutic Devices and Procedures. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:1100–1111.
    1. Stables RH. Observational research in the evidence based environment: eclipsed by the randomised controlled trial? Heart. 2002;87:101–102. doi: 10.1136/heart.87.2.101.
    1. Norris S, Atkins D. Challenges in using nonrandomized studies in systematic reviews of treatment interventions. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:1112–1119.
    1. Atkins D, Fink K, Slutsky J. Better Information for Better Health Care: The Evidence-based Practice Center Program and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:1035–1041.
    1. Dickersin K. Systematic reviews in epidemiology: why are we so far behind? Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31:6–12. doi: 10.1093/ije/31.1.6.
    1. Benson K, Hartz AJ. A comparison of observational studies and randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1878–1886. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200006223422506.
    1. Der Simonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177–188. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2.
    1. Clarke M, Oxman AD, Eds Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook 4.1.6 [updated January 2003] The Cochrane Library, Number 1, 2003 Oxford: Update Software Current version.
    1. Nickel JC. Placebo therapy of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: a 25-month study. J Urol. 1998;160:1584–1585. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199810000-00132.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren