Advertisement

Transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using a diode laser versus bipolar plasmakinetic for benign prostatic obstruction: a meta-analysis

  • 39 Accesses

Abstract

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) versus bipolar plasma kinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP) in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A systematic literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CKNI databases to identify eligible studies published before April 2019. The quality of evidence and methodology was assessed. Primary outcomes were clinical and demographic characteristics and postoperative efficacy including maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR), quality of life (QoL), and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS); secondary outcomes were intraoperative variables and major complications. Meta-analyses of extracted data were performed with the RevMan version 5.2. The overall effects were determined by the Z-test, and a p value less than 0.05 was considered with significant difference. A fixed- or random-effect model was chosen to fit the pooled heterogeneity (determined by Chi-squared test and I2). As qualified trials were few, subgroup analyses were not performed. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 451 patients were enrolled in our meta-analysis. In the included trials, all the diode (wavelength at 980 nm and 1470 nm) lasers applied output at continuous wave mode; the energy settings ranged from 120 to 160 W for enucleation and 30 to 60 W for coagulation. DiLEP provided less perioperative hemoglobin decrease (MD = − 3.22; 95% CI (− 5.15, − 1.29); p = 0.001; I2 = 65%), less postoperative catheterization time (MD = − 17.82; 95% CI (− 32.74, − 2.90); p = 0.02; I2 = 96%), less postoperative irrigation time (MD = − 7.15; 95% CI (− 13.67, − 0.62); p = 0.03; I2 = 98%), and lower incidence of urinary irritative symptoms (OR = 0.31; 95% CI (0.14, 0.67); p = 0.003; I2 = 0%) compared with PKEP. During the 1, 3, 6, and 12-month postoperative follow-up, no statistically significant difference was found in Qmax, IPSS, QoL, and PVR between the procedures. As regards other perioperative and postoperative parameters and major complications, we found no significant difference. Both DiLEP and PKEP are safe and efficient methods for the treatment of BPH. However, DiLEP showed less perioperative hemoglobin decrease, less postoperative catheterization time, less postoperative irrigation time, and lower rates of postoperative irritative symptoms compared with the PKEP group.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. 1.

    Foster HE, Barry MJ, Dahm P, Gandhi MC, Kaplan SA, Kohler TS, Lerner LB, Lightner DJ, Parsons JK, Roehrborn CG, Welliver C, Wilt TJ, McVary KT (2018) Surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia: AUA guideline. J Urol 200:612–619

  2. 2.

    Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A, Drake MJ, Madersbacher S, Mamoulakis C, Oelke M, Tikkinen KAO, Gravas S (2015) EAU guidelines on the assessment of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol 67:1099–1109

  3. 3.

    Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R (2006) Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)--incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol 50:969–979

  4. 4.

    Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Seitz M, Schlenker B, Hermanek P, Lack N, Stief CG; Urology Section of the Bavarian Working Group for Quality Assurance (2008) Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol180:246–249

  5. 5.

    Neill MG, Gilling PJ, Kennett KM, Frampton CM, Westenberg AM, Fraundorfer MR, Wilson LC (2006) Randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of prostate with plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 68:1020–1024

  6. 6.

    Zhao Z, Zeng G, Zhong W, Mai Z, Zeng S, Tao X (2010) A prospective, randomised trial comparing plasmakinetic enucleation to standard transurethral resection of the prostate for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: three-year follow-up results. Eur Urol 58:752–758

  7. 7.

    Dołowy Ł, Krajewski W, Dembowski J, Zdrojowy R, Kołodziej A (2015) The role of lasers in modern urology. Cent European J Urol 68:175–182

  8. 8.

    Yin L, Teng J, Huang CJ, Zhang X, Xu D (2013) Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Endourol 27:604–611

  9. 9.

    Li S, Zeng XT, Ruan XL, Weng H, Liu TZ, Wang X, Zhang C, Meng Z, Wang XH (2014) Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection in patients with benign prostate hyperplasia: an updated systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. PLoS One 9:e101615

  10. 10.

    Cornu JN, Ahyai S, Bachmann A, de la Rosette J, Gilling P, Gratzke C, McVary K, Novara G, Woo H, Madersbacher S (2015) A systematic review and meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic obstruction: an update. Eur Urol 67:1066–1096

  11. 11.

    Elzayat EA, Elhilali MM (2007) Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP): long-term results, reoperation rate, and possible impact of the learning curve. Eur Urol 52:1465–1471

  12. 12.

    Shah HN, Mahajan AP, Sodha HS, Hegde S, Mohile PD, Bansal MB (2007) Prospective evaluation of the learning curve for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. J Urol 177:1468–1474

  13. 13.

    Xia SJ, Zhuo J, Sun XW, Han BM, Shao Y, Zhang YN (2008) Thulium laser versus standard transurethral resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective trial. Eur Urol 53:382–389

  14. 14.

    Erol A, Cam K, Tekin A, Memik O, Coban S, Ozer Y (2009) High power diode laser vaporization of the prostate: preliminary results for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 182:1078–1082

  15. 15.

    Lusuardi L, Myatt A, Sieberer M, Jeschke S, Zimmermann R, Janetschek G (2011) Safety and efficacy of Eraser laser enucleation of the prostate: preliminary report. J Urol 186:1967–1971

  16. 16.

    Liu C, Zheng S, Li H, Xu K (2010) Transurethral enucleation and resection of prostate in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia by plasma kinetics. J Urol 184:2440–2445

  17. 17.

    Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA; PRISMA-P Group (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 350:g7647

  18. 18.

    Durieux N, Vandenput S, Pasleau F (2013) OCEBM levels of evidence system. Rev Med Liege 68:644–649

  19. 19.

    Higgins Jpt, Green SE (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. The cochrane collaboration (Eds). Naunyn-Schmiedebergs Archiv für experimentelle Pathologie und Pharmakologie 5:S38

  20. 20.

    Xu A, Zou Y, Li B, Liu C, Zheng S, Li H, Xu Y, Chen B, Xu K, Shen H (2013) 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 27:1254–1260

  21. 21.

    Wu G, Hong Z, Li C, Bian C, Huang S, Wu D (2016) A comparative study of diode laser and plasmakinetic in transurethral enucleation of the prostate for treating large volume benign prostatic hyperplasia: a randomized clinical trial with 12-month follow-up. Lasers Med Sci 31:599–604

  22. 22.

    Jiang D, Pang J, Xiao C, Li M, Zhang H, Wang Y, Gao X (2017) Randomized controlled trial comparing between 1470 nm diode laser enucleation of the prostate and plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate for treating benign prostate hyperplasia. J Clin Urology (China) 12:908–911

  23. 23.

    Zou Z, Xu A, Zheng S, Chen B, Xu Y, Li H, Duan C, Zheng J, Chen J, Li C, Wang Y, Gao Y, Liang C, Liu C (2018) Dual-centre randomized-controlled trial comparing transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using diode laser vs. bipolar plasmakinetic for the treatment of LUTS secondary of benign prostate obstruction: 1-year follow-up results. World J Urol 36:1117–1126

  24. 24.

    Dincel C, Samli MM, Guler C, Demirbas M, Karalar M (2004) Plasma kinetic vaporization of the prostate: clinical evaluation of a new technique. J Endourol 18:293–298

  25. 25.

    Erturhan S, Erbagci A, Seckiner I, Yagci F, Ustun A (2007) Plasmakinetic resection of the prostate versus standard transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective randomized trial with 1-year follow-up. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 10:97–100

  26. 26.

    Bhansali M, Patankar S, Dobhada S, Khaladkar S (2009) Management of large (>60 g) prostate gland: PlasmaKinetic Superpulse (bipolar) versus conventional (monopolar) transurethral resection of the prostate. J Endourol 23:141–145

  27. 27.

    Hon NH, Brathwaite D, Hussain Z, Ghiblawi S, Brace H, Hayne D, Coppinger SW (2006) A prospective, randomized trial comparing conventional transurethral prostate resection with PlasmaKinetic vaporization of the prostate: physiological changes, early complications and long-term followup. J Urol 176:205–209

  28. 28.

    Geavlete B, Stanescu F, Iacoboaie C, Geavlete P (2013) Bipolar plasma enucleation of the prostate vs open prostatectomy in large benign prostatic hyperplasia cases - a medium term, prospective, randomized comparison. BJU Int 111:793–803

  29. 29.

    Rao JM, Yang JR, Ren YX, He J, Ding P, Yang JH (2013) 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 82:176–181

  30. 30.

    Wendt-Nordahl G, Huckele S, Honeck P, Alken P, Knoll T, Michel MS, Häcker A (2007) 980-nm diode laser: a novel laser technology for vaporization of the prostate. Eur Urol 52:1723–1728

  31. 31.

    Zhao Y, Liu C, Zhou G, Yu C, Zhang Y, Ouyang Y (2013) A retrospective evaluation of benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment by transurethral vaporization using a 1470 nm laser. Photomed Laser Surg 31:626–629

  32. 32.

    Wezel F, Wendt-Nordahl G, Huck N, Bach T, Weiss C, Michel MS, Häcker A (2010) New alternatives for laser vaporization of the prostate: experimental evaluation of a 980-, 1,318- and 1,470-nm diode laser device. World J Urol 28:181–186

  33. 33.

    Seitz M, Bayer T, Ruszat R, Tilki D, Bachmann A, Gratzke C, Schlenker B, Stief C, Sroka R, Reich O (2009) Preliminary evaluation of a novel side-fire diode laser emitting light at 940 nm, for the potential treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: ex-vivo and in-vivo investigations. BJU Int 103:770–775

  34. 34.

    Liu Z, Li YW, Wu WR, Lu Q (2017) Long-term clinical efficacy and safety profile of transurethral resection of prostate versus plasmakinetic resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 103:198–203

  35. 35.

    Lourenco T, Armstrong N, N'Dow J, Nabi G, Deverill M, Pickard R, Vale L, MacLennan G, Fraser C, McClinton S, Wong S, Coutts A, Mowatt G, Grant A (2008) Systematic review and economic modelling of effectiveness and cost utility of surgical treatments for men with benign prostatic enlargement. Health Technol Assess 12:iii, ix-x, 1-146, 169-515

  36. 36.

    Elmansy HM, Kotb A, Elhilali MM (2011) Is there a way to predict stress urinary incontinence after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate? J Urol 186:1977–1981

  37. 37.

    Chen S, Zhu L, Cai J, Zheng Z, Ge R, Wu M, Deng Z, Zhou H, Yang S, Wu W, Liao L, Tan J (2014) 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 66:284–291

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Kun-Jie Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Meta-analysis does not require an ethical review.

Informed consent

Meta-analysis does not require an informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xiao, K., Zhou, L., He, Q. et al. Transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using a diode laser versus bipolar plasmakinetic for benign prostatic obstruction: a meta-analysis. Lasers Med Sci (2020) doi:10.1007/s10103-020-02949-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Diode laser
  • Plasmakinetic
  • Enucleation
  • BHP
  • Meta-analysis