Xiao Kai-Wen, Zhou Liang, He Qing, Gao Xiao-Shuai, Chen Guo, Ma Yu-Cheng, Li Hong, Wang Kun-Jie
Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610041, People's Republic of China.
Lasers Med Sci. 2019 Jun;34(4):815-826. doi: 10.1007/s10103-018-02697-x. Epub 2019 Jan 2.
To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of thulium laser vapoenucleation/enucleation of the prostate (ThuEP) versus holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify eligible studies published before July 2018. Meta-analysis of extracted data was performed with RevMan version 5.3. We chose the fixed- or random-effect model to fit the pooled heterogeneity. Five eligible studies including two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and three non-RCTs involving 1010 patients were enrolled in our meta-analysis. ThuEP provided less enucleation time when compared with HoLEP (WMD = - 7.73, 95% CI - 14.39-1.07, P = 0.02). During the 1st, 6th, and 12th months of postoperative follow-ups, statistically significant differences were found in Qmax (WMD = 2.05, 95% CI 0.523.58) and PVR (WMD = - 6.50, 95% CI - 7.35- 5.66, P < 0.001) in the 1st month after the operation, also in IPSS (IPSS: WMD = - 1.29, 95% CI - 2.39~- 0.19, P = 0.02) in the 12th month after the operation. As regards other perioperative, postoperative parameters, and complication rates, we found no significant difference. Both ThuEP and HoLEP provided satisfactory micturition improvement with low morbidity after the 1st and 6th months of the operation. However, ThuEP showed higher enucleation efficacy and less intraoperative blood loss and may get a better outcome as compared to the HoLEP group in the early postoperative period with regard to Qmax/PVR and IPSS after the 1st and 12th months of the operation respectively.
评估铥激光前列腺剜除术/前列腺摘除术(ThuEP)与钬激光前列腺剜除术(HoLEP)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)的临床疗效和安全性。使用PubMed、Embase和Web of Science进行系统文献检索,以识别2018年7月之前发表的符合条件的研究。对提取的数据进行Meta分析,使用RevMan 5.3版本。我们选择固定效应或随机效应模型来拟合合并的异质性。五项符合条件的研究纳入了我们的Meta分析,包括两项随机对照试验(RCT)和三项非RCT,涉及1010例患者。与HoLEP相比,ThuEP的剜除时间更短(加权均数差[WMD] = -7.73,95%置信区间[CI] -14.39至1.07,P = 0.02)。在术后第1、6和12个月的随访中,术后第1个月时,最大尿流率(Qmax)(WMD = 2.05,95% CI 0.52至3.58)和残余尿量(PVR)(WMD = -6.50,95% CI -7.35至-5.66,P < 0.001)存在统计学显著差异,术后第12个月时国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)(IPSS:WMD = -1.29,95% CI -2.39至-0.19,P = 0.02)也存在统计学显著差异。至于其他围手术期、术后参数和并发症发生率,我们未发现显著差异。在术后第1和6个月时,ThuEP和HoLEP均能使排尿情况得到满意改善且发病率较低。然而,ThuEP显示出更高的剜除效率、更少的术中失血,并且在术后第1和12个月时,分别在Qmax/PVR和IPSS方面,与HoLEP组相比,在术后早期可能获得更好的结果。