Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) during an 18-months follow-up.
Patients and methods: A series of 59 patients older than 40 years were included in this study. The entry criteria were prostate size <70 g, maximum urinary flow rate (Q(max)) <15 mL/sec, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) >13, and no suspicion of prostate cancer according to the clinical or laboratory findings. Of the patients, 26 (44%) were treated with TUNA and 33 (56%) with TURP. At 3 and 18 months of follow-up, Q(max), postvoiding residual volume (PVR), IPSS, and the quality of life (QOL) score were compared with the baseline values. The results were also compared in patients undergoing TUNA v TURP.
Results: Improvements in Q(max), PVR, IPSS, and QOL score were statistically significant for both groups at 3 and 18 months of follow-up. The increase in the mean Q(max) of the TURP group was higher than that in the TUNA group, whereas no significant differences were found in the two groups regarding improvements in IPSS and QOL score. There were no complications associated with the TUNA procedure, while 16 retrograde ejaculation, 4 erectile impairment, 2 urethral stenosis, and 1 urinary incontinence cases were observed after TURP.
Conclusions: The TUNA procedure is an effective and safe minimally invasive treatment with negligible adverse effect for selected patients with symptomatic BPH compared with TURP. It should be considered as an alternative treatment option for younger patients who want to preserve sexual function.