Efficacy of bipolar ‘button’ plasma vaporisation of the prostate compared to green laser vaporisation for benign prostatic obstruction

Abstract

Objective:

Our objectives were to evaluate the efficiency of transurethral bipolar plasma vaporisation of the prostate (BPVP) using the button electrode and compare it to green laser vaporisation of the prostate (GLVP).

Patients and methods:

During the period March 2012 to January 2017, 155 patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) were enrolled in our study. Overall, 80 patients underwent BPVP and 75 GLVP. All International Prostate Symptom Scores (IPSS), quality of life (QOL), uroflow Qmax, Qave and post-void residual (PVR) urine samples were evaluated 24 hours preoperatively and at three months postoperatively. Operative time, hospital stay, catheterisation time, and complications were reported. Mean serum haemoglobin, haematocrit and serum sodium changes were reported preoperatively and within 24 hours postoperatively in both groups. Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS program version 20 for Windows.

Results:

Mean age at surgery was 62.8 ± 4 (53–82) years and 63 ± 6.6 (54–86) years for the BPVP and GLVP groups respectively. Mean prostatic volume was 45 ± 10 (36–90) and 43 ± 9 (32–85) in each group, respectively. Patients from both series had similar preoperative characteristics. The mean operative duration was 58 ± 21 (range: 20–70) minutes and 57 ± 13 (range: 24–75) minutes, hospital stay was 12.2 ± 6.4 (12–60) hours vs 7 ± 3.3 (6–48) hours (p = 0.01), and catheterisation period was 48 ± 1.28 (24–72) hours vs 6 ± 6.2 (6–7) hours (p = 0.001).

Conclusions:

Both BPVP and GLVP offer good options for management of BPO with less bleeding, one-day surgery, less catheterisation time with significant improvement of IPSS, QOL score and uroflow postoperatively. However, more studies comparing the cost of both techniques are needed for a solid conclusion.

Level of evidence:

Not applicable for this multicentre audit.

Keywords

Bipolar prostate hyperplasia green laser vaporisation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Oelke

Bachmann

Descazeaud

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.

Mamoulakis

Schulze

Skolarikos

et al . Midterm results from an international multicenter randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar with monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 667–676.

Bachmann

Woo

Wyler

Laser prostatectomy of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostate enlargement: A critical review of evidence. Curr Opinion Urol 2012; 22: 22–33.

Montorsi

Naspro

Salonia

et al . Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate: Results from a 2-center prospective randomized trial in patients with obstructive benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 2008; 179 (Suppl): S87–S90.

Ahyai

Gilling

Kaplan

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.

Otsuki

Kuwahara

Kosaka

et al . Transurethral resection in saline vaporization: Evaluation of clinical efficacy and prostate volume. Urology 2012; 79: 665–669.

Zhang

Geng

Zheng

et al . Photoselective vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A meta-analysis. J Endourol 2012; 26: 1109–1117.

Reich

Schlenker

Gratzke

et al . Plasma vaporisation of the prostate: Initial clinical results. Eur Urol 2010; 57: 693–697.

Paulkis

Dahman

Witzsch

et al . Transurethral electrovaporization vs transurethral resection for symptomatic prostatic obstruction: A meta-analysis. BJU Int 2004; 94: 89–95.

10.

Emberton

Neal

Black

et al . The effect of prostatectomy on symptom severity and quality of life. Br J Urol 1996; 77: 233–247.

11.

Zhang

et al . Efficacy and safety of bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate with “button-type” electrode compared with transurethral resection of prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Chin Med J (Engl) 2012; 125: 3811–3814.

12.

Tefekli

Muslumanoglu

Baykal

et al . A hybrid technique using bipolar energy in transurethral prostate surgery: A prospective, randomized comparison. J Urol 2005; 174: 1339–1343.

13.

Fagerström

Nyman

Hahn

RG.

Complications and clinical outcome 18 months after bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. J Endourol 2011; 25: 1043-1049.

14.

Rassweiler

Schulze

Stock

et al . Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate – technical modifications and early clinical experience. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2007; 16: 11-21.

15.

Aboutaleb

Efficacy of bipolar “button” plasma vaporization of the prostate for benign prostatic obstruction, compared to the standard technique. Urol Ann 2015; 7: 442-447.

16.

Ruszat

Seitz

Wyler

et al . Green Light laser vaporization of the prostate: Single-center experience and long-term results after 500 procedures. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 893-901.

17.

Son

Min

et al . Modified vaporization-resection for photoselective vaporization of the prostate using a GreenLight high-performance system 120-W Laser: The Seoul technique. Urology 2011; 77: 427-432.

18.

Burke

Whelan

Goeree

et al . Systematic review and meta-analysis of transurethral resection of the prostate versus minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction. Urology 2010; 75: 1015-1022.

19.

Mamoulakis

Ubbink

de la Rosette

JJ.

Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Urol 2009; 56: 798-809.

20.

Botto

Lebret

Barré

et al . Electrovaporization of the prostate with the Gyrus device. J Endourol 2001; 15: 313–316.

21.

Eaton

Francis

RN.

The provision of transurethral prostatectomy on a day-case basis using bipolar plasma kinetic technology. BJU Int 2002; 89: 534–537.

22.

Strope

Yang

Nepple

et al . Population based comparative effectiveness of transurethral resection of the prostate and laser therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 2012; 187: 1341–1345.

23.

Dincel

Samli

Guler

et al . Plasma kinetic vaporization of the prostate: Clinical evaluation of a new technique. J Endourol 2004; 18: 293-298.

24.

Dunsmuir

McFarlane

Tan

et al . Gyrus bipolar electrovaporization vs transurethral resection of the prostate: A randomized prospective single-blind trial with 1 y follow-up. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2003; 6: 182-186.

25.

Karaman

Kaya

Ozturk

et al . Comparison of transurethral vaporization using PlasmaKinetic energy and transurethral resection of prostate: 1-year follow-up. J Endourol 2005; 19: 734-737.

26.

Geavlete

Georgescu

Multescu

et al . Bipolar plasma vaporization vs monopolar and bipolar TURP – A prospective, randomized, long-term comparison. Urology 2011; 78: 930-935.

27.

Rieken

Mundorff

Bonkat

et al . Complications of laser prostatectomy: A review of recent data. World J Urol 2010; 28: 53–62.

28.

Campbell

Chung

Yoon

et al . Early experience photo-selective vaporization of the prostate using the 180 W lithium triborate and comparison with the 120 W lithium triborate laser. Prostate Int 2013; 1: 42–45.

29.

Kaya

Ilktac

Gokmen

et al . The long-term results of transurethral vaporization of the prostate using plasmakinetic energy. BJU Int 2007; 99: 845-848.

30.

Hammadeh

Madaan

Hines

et al . 5-year outcome of a prospective randomized trial to compare transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate and standard transurethral resection. Urology 2003; 61: 1166-1171.