Lim Chye-Yang, Lai Chih-Cheng, Tsai Ya-Wen
Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan, TWN.
Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Chi Mei Medical Center, Tainan, TWN.
Cureus. 2025 Mar 20;17(3):e80914. doi: 10.7759/cureus.80914. eCollection 2025 Mar.
Background Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift are among the minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs) gaining popularity in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). This study aims to evaluate and compare the reintervention rates, a measure of durability, for Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift as MISTs for BPH. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, a large database of electronic health records from January 2014 to June 2024. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision codes (ICD-10) were used to build the cohorts of men aged over 18 years who underwent either Rezum water vapor therapy or UroLift. Reintervention rates and complication profiles were evaluated over a follow-up period of up to five years. Results Cumulative reintervention rates were collected for both Rezum water vapor therapy and UroLift at the 1st, 3rd, and 5th years (2.83% vs. 3.59%, 5.99% vs. 8.76%, 6.81% vs. 10.85%). The average annual increase rate was 1% for Rezum water vapor therapy compared with 1.82% for UroLift, respectively. Most complications were more prominent in the Rezum water vapor therapy group, with urinary retention accounting for 23.42%. Discussion Rezum water vapor therapy demonstrates a more durable effect with lower reintervention rates compared to UroLift, based on this large multicenter cohort study. The higher reintervention rate observed with UroLift may reflect differences in the mechanisms of action between the two procedures. Conclusions These findings elucidate the superiority of Rezum water vapor therapy in sustaining the therapeutic effect over the long term compared to UroLift. However, more complications were noted in the Rezum water vapor therapy group. Thus, clinicians should take into account the durability and complication profiles in shared decision-making when considering MISTs for BPH.
瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法和UroLift是在良性前列腺增生(BPH)治疗中越来越受欢迎的微创手术疗法(MIST)。本研究旨在评估和比较瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法和UroLift作为BPH的MIST的再次干预率(一种衡量耐久性的指标)。方法:我们使用TriNetX全球合作网络的数据进行了一项回顾性队列研究,该网络是一个包含2014年1月至2024年6月电子健康记录的大型数据库。使用当前手术操作术语(CPT)和国际疾病分类第10版代码(ICD-10)来建立接受瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法或UroLift的18岁以上男性队列。在长达五年的随访期内评估再次干预率和并发症情况。结果:收集了瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法和UroLift在第1年、第3年和第5年的累积再次干预率(分别为2.83%对3.59%、5.99%对8.76%、6.81%对10.85%)。瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法的年均增长率为1%,而UroLift为1.82%。大多数并发症在瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法组中更为突出,尿潴留占23.42%。讨论:基于这项大型多中心队列研究,与UroLift相比,瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法显示出更持久的效果和更低的再次干预率。UroLift观察到的较高再次干预率可能反映了两种手术作用机制的差异。结论:这些发现阐明了与UroLift相比,瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法在长期维持治疗效果方面的优越性。然而,瑞祖姆水蒸气疗法组中发现了更多并发症。因此,临床医生在考虑BPH的MIST时,应在共同决策中考虑耐久性和并发症情况。