Comparing the safety and efficiency of conventional monopolar, plasmakinetic, and holmium laser transurethral resection of primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.

PURPOSE

To compare the safety and efficiency of conventional monopolar, plasmakinetic and holmium laser transurethral resection of bladder tumor (CM-TURBT, PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT) while managing primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2005 to 2009, 173 patients with primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer underwent endoscopic surgery. Among them, 51 patients underwent CM-TURBT, 58 patients underwent PK-TURBT, and 64 patients underwent HoL-TURBT. All patients were divided into three risk groups (low, intermediate, and high) based on the European Association of Urology guidelines and prognostic factors of recurrence. Clinical data, included preoperative, operative, and postoperative management and follow-up, were recorded.

RESULTS

Patient demographics and tumor characteristics in all three groups were compared before surgery. There was no significant difference in operative duration among the three groups. Compared with the CM-TURBT group, both PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT groups had less intraoperative and postoperative complications, including obturator nerve reflex, bladder perforation, as well as bleeding and postoperative bladder irritation. There were no significant differences among the three groups in the transfusion rate and occurrence of urethral strictures. Patients in the PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT groups had less catheterization and hospitalization time than those in the CM-TURBT group, and there were no significant differences in each risk subgroup as well as the overall recurrence rate among the CM-TURBT, PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT might prove to be preferable alternatives to CM-TURBT management of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. PK-TURBT and HoL-TURBT, however, did not demonstrate an obvious advantage over CM-TURBT in tumor recurrence rate.