Format

Send to

Choose Destination
World J Urol. 2018 Oct 3. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2494-1. [Epub ahead of print]

Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years.

Author information

1
Department of Urology, University Clinic of Tubingen, Tuebingen, Germany. KD_Sievert@hotmail.com.
2
Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. KD_Sievert@hotmail.com.
3
Department of Urology, University Clinic of Rostock, Rostock, Germany. KD_Sievert@hotmail.com.
4
Klinikum Lippe Detmold, Detmold, Germany. KD_Sievert@hotmail.com.
5
Department of Urology, University Clinic of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
6
Department of Urology, PAN Klinik Köln, Cologne, Germany.
7
Department of Urology, University Clinic of Tubingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
8
Department of Urology, University Clinic of Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
9
Department of Urology, University Clinic of Munich, Munich, Germany.
10
Department of Urology, Klinikum Kassel, Kassel, Germany.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

Successful outcomes have been reported for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) with the prostatic urethral lift (PUL) in a number of clinical investigations. Our aim was to investigate PUL outcomes in patients treated in a day-to-day clinical setting without the rigid exclusion criteria of clinical studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We investigated the outcome of the PUL procedure at five German departments during the initial period when PUL was approved for the clinic (10/2012-06/2014). All candidates for transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) received PUL information and were given the choice of procedures. The only exclusion criterion was an obstructive median lobe. No patients were excluded because of high post-void residual volume (PVR), prostate size, retention history or LUTS oral therapy. Maximum urinary flow (Qmax), PVR, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Quality of Life (QOL) were assessed at baseline, 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery.

RESULTS:

Of 212 TURP candidates, 86 choose PUL. A mean of 3.8 (2-7) UroLift implants were implanted in patients of 38-85 years with a prostate size of 17-111 ml over 57 (42-90) min under general or local anesthesia. Thirty-eight (38.4%) patients had severe BPH obstruction and would have been denied PUL utilizing previously reported study criteria. Within 1 month 74 (86%) reported substantial symptom relief with significant improvements in Qmax, PVR, IPSS, and QOL (p < 0.001) that was maintained within the follow-up. Sexual function including ejaculation was unchanged or improved. No Clavien-Dindo Grad ≥ 2 was reported postoperatively. Eleven (12.8%) patients were retreated over 2 years. Twelve (86%) of 14 patients presenting with chronic urinary retention were catheter free at last follow-up.

CONCLUSION:

PUL is a promising surgical technique that may alleviate LUTS, even in patients with severe obstruction.

KEYWORDS:

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH); LUTS; Minimally invasive surgical therapy; Prostatic urethral lift (PUL); Transurethral resection of prostate

PMID:
30283994
DOI:
10.1007/s00345-018-2494-1

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center