Endoscopic enucleation versus open prostatectomy for treating large benign prostatic hyperplasia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Maoyin Li, Jianguang Qiu, Qi Hou, Dejuan Wang, Wentao Huang, Cheng Hu, Ke Li, Xin Gao, Maoyin Li, Jianguang Qiu, Qi Hou, Dejuan Wang, Wentao Huang, Cheng Hu, Ke Li, Xin Gao

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the overall efficacy and safety of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EP) vs open prostatectomy (OP) for large benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

Methods: We conducted an electronic search of PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to detect all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EP with OP. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3.

Results: Seven RCTs (735 patients) were included. At the 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up, there were no significant differences in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), quality of life (QoL) score and post-void residual urine volume (PVR) between EP and OP. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) was higher with EP (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21 to 1.78, p=0.01) at the 12-month follow-up. The catheterization time (WMD: 3.80 d, 95%CI: -5.11 to -2.48, P<0.00001) and hospital stay (WMD: 4.93 d, 95%CI: -5.96 to -3.89, P<0.00001) were shorter with EP. The duration of operation was longer for EP compared with OP (WMD: 16.21 min, 95%CI: 3.72 to 28.70, P=0.01). The resected tissue weight (WMD: -9.63 g, 95%CI: -14.46 to -4.81, P<0.0001) and decrease in hemoglobin (WMD: -1.14 g/dL, 95%CI: -1.81 to -0.47, P=0.0008) were less with EP. EP was associated with fewer blood transfusions (risk ratio: 0.22, 95%CI: 0.10 to 0.47, P=0.0001). There were no significant differences between EP and OP when comparing other complications.

Conclusions: Although only a limited number of RCTs with relatively limited follow-up are available, EP is shown to have a similar postoperative profile and comparable safety to OP. By contrast, EP may have a more desirable perioperative profile. EP appears to be an effective and safe minimally invasive option for treating large prostates that requires only brief convalescence.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1. Flowchart.
Fig 1. Flowchart.
Flowchart of the selection of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the meta-analysis.

References

    1. McConnell JD. The pathophysiology of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Androl. 1991; 12: 356–363.
    1. Girman CJ, Jacobsen SJ, Tsukamoto T, Richard F, Garraway WM, Sagnier PP, et al. Health-related quality of life associated with lower urinary tract symptoms in four countries. Urology. 1998; 51: 428–436.
    1. Welch G, Weinger K, Barry MJ. Quality-of-life impact of lower urinary tract symptom severity: results from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. Urology. 2002; 59: 245–250.
    1. Gu FL, Xia TL, Kong XT. Preliminary study of the frequency of benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostatic cancer in China. Urology. 1994; 44: 688–691.
    1. Oelke M, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A, Emberton M, Gravas S, Michel MC, et al. EAU guidelines on the treatment and follow-up of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol. 2013; 64: 118–140. 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.004
    1. Naspro R, Suardi N, Salonia A, Scattoni V, Guazzoni G, Colombo R, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates >70 g: 24-month follow-up. Eur Urol. 2006; 50: 563–568.
    1. Kuntz RM, Lehrich K, Ahyai SA. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates greater than 100 grams: 5-year follow-up results of a randomised clinical trial. Eur Urol. 2008; 53: 160–168.
    1. Suer E, Gokce I, Yaman O, Anafarta K, Gogus O. Open prostatectomy is still a valid option for large prostates: a high-volume, single-center experience. Urology. 2008; 72: 90–94. 10.1016/j.urology.2008.03.015
    1. Serretta V, Morgia G, Fondacaro L, Curto G, Lo bianco A, Pirritano D, et al. Open prostatectomy for benign prostatic enlargement in southern Europe in the late 1990s: a contemporary series of 1800 interventions. Urology. 2002; 60: 623–627.
    1. Ahyai SA, Gilling P, Kaplan SA, Kuntz RM, Madersbacher S, Montorsi F, et al. Meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic enlargement. Eur Urol. 2010; 58: 384–397. 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.06.005
    1. Gilling PJ, Cass CB, Cresswell MD, Fraundorfer MR. Holmium laser resection of the prostate: preliminary results of a new method for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 1996; 47: 48–51.
    1. Tan AH, Gilling PJ, Kennett KM, Frampton C, Westenberg AM, Fraundorfer MR. A randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate with transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands (40 to 200 grams). J Urol. 2003; 170: 1270–1274.
    1. Carmignani L, Picozzi S, Casellato S, Bozzini G, Maruccia S. Thulium laser enucleation of the prostate versus transvesical open enucleation for prostate adenoma: A randomized prospective trial. J Urol. 2013; 189: e892.
    1. Xu A, Zou Y, Li B, Liu C, Zheng S, Li H, et al. A randomized trial comparing diode laser enucleation of the prostate with plasmakinetic enucleation and resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Endourol. 2013; 27: 1254–1260. 10.1089/end.2013.0107
    1. Zheng SB, Liu CX, Xu YW. [Application of intracavitary retrograde dissection in transurethral vaporization resection of the prostate]. Di Yi Jun Yi Da Xue Xue Bao. 2005; 25: 734–735, 738.
    1. Gilling PJ, Kennett KM, Fraundorfer MR. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for glands larger than 100 g: an endourologic alternative to open prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2000; 14: 529–531.
    1. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996; 17: 1–12.
    1. Kjaergard LL, Villumsen J, Gluud C. Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2001; 135: 982–989.
    1. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7: 177–188.
    1. Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959; 22: 719–748.
    1. Zhang Y, Du CJ, Xu G, Chen JM, Jing X. Transurethral holmium laser enucleation for prostate adenoma greater than 100 g. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2007; 13: 1091–1093.
    1. Rao JM, Yang JR, Ren YX, He J, Ding P, Yang JH. Plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate versus transvesical open prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia >80 mL: 12-month follow-up results of a randomized clinical trial. Urology. 2013; 82: 176–181. 10.1016/j.urology.2013.02.032
    1. Ou RB, Deng XR, Yang WJ, Wei XH, Chen H, Xie KJ. Transurethral enucleation and resection of the prostate vs transvesical prostatectomy for prostate volumes > 80mL: a prospective randomized study. BJU Int. 2013; 112: 239–245. 10.1111/bju.12181
    1. Chen S, Zhu L, Cai J, Zheng Z, Ge R, Wu M, et al. Plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate compared with open prostatectomy for prostates larger than 100 grams: A randomized noninferiority controlled trial with long-term results at 6 years. Eur Urol. 2014; 66: 284–291. 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.010
    1. Geavlete B, Stanescu F, Iacoboaie C, Geavlete P. Bipolar plasma enucleation of the prostate vs open prostatectomy in large benign prostatic hyperplasia cases—A medium term, prospective, randomized comparison. BJU Int. 2013; 111: 793–803. 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11730.x
    1. Moher D, Pham B, Jones A, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Moher M, et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 1998; 352: 609–613.
    1. Freyer PJ. Total enucleation of the prostate: a further series of 550 cases of the operation. Br Med J. 1919; 1: 121–120.122.
    1. Varkarakis I, Kyriakakis Z, Delis A, Protogerou V, Deliveliotis C. Long-term results of open transvesical prostatectomy from a contemporary series of patients. Urology. 2004; 64: 306–310.
    1. Bruskewitz R. Management of symptomatic BPH in the US: who is treated and how? Eur Urol. 1999; 36 Suppl 3: 7–13.
    1. Lukacs B. Management of symptomatic BPH in France: who is treated and how? Eur Urol. 1999; 36 Suppl 3: 14–20.
    1. Ahlstrand C, Carlsson P, Jonsson B. An estimate of the life-time cost of surgical treatment of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia in Sweden. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1996; 30: 37–43.
    1. Mozes B, Cohen YC, Olmer L, Shabtai E. Factors affecting change in quality of life after prostatectomy for benign prostatic hypertrophy: the impact of surgical techniques. J Urol. 1996; 155: 191–196.
    1. Liu C, Zheng S, Li H, Xu K. Transurethral enucleation and resection of prostate in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia by plasma kinetics. J Urol. 2010; 184: 2440–2445. 10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.037
    1. Kuntz RM, Lehrich K. Transurethral holmium laser enucleation versus transvesical open enucleation for prostate adenoma greater than 100 gm.: A randomized prospective trial of 120 patients. J Urol. 2002; 168: 1465–1469.
    1. Kuntz RM, Lehrich K, Ahyai S. Transurethral holmium laser enucleation of the prostate compared with transvesical open prostatectomy: 18-month follow-up of a randomized trial. J Endourol. 2004; 18: 189–191.
    1. El-Hakim A, Elhilali MM. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate can be taught: the first learning experience. BJU Int. 2002; 90: 863–869.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera