Pulse modulation in En-Bloc HoLEP: does it really matter? : a propensity score matched analysis
Introduction: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is an established option in the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Pulse modulation, such as MOSES® technology, has recently been introduced and may offer potential advantages in HoLEP. Methods: Perioperative data from...
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Dokumenttyp: | Article (Journal) |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
14 March 2024
|
| In: |
World journal of urology
Year: 2024, Jahrgang: 42, Pages: 1-7 |
| ISSN: | 1433-8726 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s00345-024-04830-8 |
| Online-Zugang: | Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-024-04830-8
|
| Verfasserangaben: | Friedrich Otto Hartung, Luisa Egen, Britta Gruene, Maren Juliane Wenk, Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski, Paul Patroi, Marie-Claire Rassweiler-Seyfried, Maurice Stephan Michel, Jonas Herrmann |
| Zusammenfassung: | Introduction: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is an established option in the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Pulse modulation, such as MOSES® technology, has recently been introduced and may offer potential advantages in HoLEP. Methods: Perioperative data from 117 patients who underwent MOSES® laser enucleation of the prostate (MoLEP) were collected. Propensity score matching using prostate volume, age, body mass index (BMI), and anticoagulant intake was performed using a database of 237 patients treated with HoLEP. In total, 234 patients were included in the analysis. Results: Prostate volume (104 vs. 102 ml), age (70 vs. 71 years), BMI (27 vs. 27), and anticoagulant intake (34 vs. 35%) did not differ significantly between the groups. There were no significant differences in operation time (61.5 vs. 58.1 min, p = 0.42), enucleation efficiency (2.5 vs. 2.6 g/min, p = 0.74), hemostasis time (7.8 vs. 8 min, p = 0.75) and hemoglobin drop (0.9 vs. 0.7 mg/dl, p = 0.48). The complication rates were low in both groups (16.2% for HoLEP and 17.1% for MoLEP). No differences were noted in the Clavien-Dindo Classification (p = 0.63) and the Comprehensive Complication Index (p = 0.24). The rate of complications > CDC IIIa was 0.9% for HoLEP (endoscopic coagulation) and 1.7% for MoLEP (2 cases of endoscopic coagulation). No transfusions were administered. Conclusion: Overall, the enucleation efficiency was high in both groups and the procedure time was short. HoLEP is an efficient and safe treatment option in experienced hands, regardless of the use of pulse modulation technology. |
|---|---|
| Beschreibung: | Gesehen am 09.08.2024 |
| Beschreibung: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 1433-8726 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s00345-024-04830-8 |