Sanchez Desiree E, Ghoreifi Alireza, Storino Ramacciotti Lorenzo, Cai Jie, Maas Marissa, Venkat Abhishek, Lee Randall, Abreu Andre Luis, Cacciamani Giovanni E, Doumanian Leo, Gill Inderbir, Liu-Chen Andrew, Nguyen Mike, Sotelo Rene, Desai Mihir M
USC Institute of Urology and Catherine & Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
J Endourol. 2025 Jan;39(1):50-55. doi: 10.1089/end.2024.0370. Epub 2024 Dec 6.
Aquablation for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) has been adopted to treat a wide range of prostate anatomies including glands up to 150 cc. Patients with recurrence of LUTS after previous BPH procedure often present with variant anatomy, and a paucity of literature exists on the optimal treatment modality for these patients. Herein, we evaluate the safety and feasibility of aquablation in patients with previous BPH surgical history. A prospectively managed single institution database of aquablation patients with BPH/LUTS was queried from August 2020 to December 2022 for patients who failed previous BPH procedures. Patients were divided into two groups: those with and without previous BPH procedure. Primary outcomes were intraoperative and 90-day complications. Secondary outcomes included operative time (OT), number of Aquabeam passes, estimated blood loss, hospital length of stay, and catheter duration. Outcomes were assessed using chi-squared, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and logistic regression. A total of 200 patients with BPH/LUTS were treated with aquablation. We identified 26 patients with a history of previous BPH procedures. Patients who underwent previous BPH procedures had smaller prostate volumes (60 cc) compared with treatment-naïve (88 cc) patients, = 0.016. There was no difference in perioperative and 90-day complications (29% for treatment-naïve 17% in the retreatment group, = 0.32). Most secondary outcomes were the same including OT, but the retreatment group had fewer Aquabeam passes (2 [1-2] 2 [2-2] treatment-naïve, = 0.037) and more additional procedures at follow-up (30% 8.3% treatment-naïve, = 0.005). Patients with previous BPH interventions remain excellent candidates for aquablation, with similar perioperative and 90-day postoperative outcomes compared with intervention-naïve patients. Aquablation demonstrates efficient tissue ablation without the risk of increased injury or significant blood loss after prior failed BPH procedures.
水刀消融术已被用于治疗因良性前列腺增生(BPH)继发的下尿路症状(LUTS),可处理各种前列腺解剖结构,包括体积达150立方厘米的腺体。既往接受过BPH手术的LUTS复发患者,其解剖结构往往存在变异,而针对这些患者的最佳治疗方式,相关文献较少。在此,我们评估水刀消融术在有既往BPH手术史患者中的安全性和可行性。2020年8月至2022年12月期间,在一个前瞻性管理的单机构BPH/LUTS水刀消融术患者数据库中,查询既往BPH手术失败的患者。患者分为两组:有和没有既往BPH手术史的患者。主要结局指标为术中及90天并发症。次要结局指标包括手术时间(OT)、水刀脉冲次数、估计失血量、住院时间和导尿管留置时间。采用卡方检验、Wilcoxon秩和检验和逻辑回归评估结局。共有200例BPH/LUTS患者接受了水刀消融术。我们确定了26例有既往BPH手术史的患者。与未接受过治疗的患者(88立方厘米)相比,既往接受过BPH手术的患者前列腺体积较小(60立方厘米),P = 0.016。围手术期及90天并发症无差异(未接受过治疗的患者为29%,再次治疗组为17%,P = 0.32)。大多数次要结局指标相同,包括OT,但再次治疗组水刀脉冲次数较少(2[1 - 2]对未接受过治疗的患者为2[2 - 2],P = 0.037),随访时额外手术更多(30%对未接受过治疗的患者为8.3%,P = 0.005)。有既往BPH干预史的患者仍是水刀消融术的理想候选者,与未接受过干预的患者相比,围手术期及术后90天结局相似。水刀消融术在既往BPH手术失败后,能有效消融组织,且无增加损伤风险或大量失血的风险。