Darwazeh Hashem, Ng Keng Lim, Barber Neil
Urology Department - Frimley Park Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Portsmouth Road, Frimley, Camberley, GU16 7UJ, England.
World J Urol. 2025 Sep 3;43(1):535. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05897-7.
The influence of a previous Urolift treatment on the outcomes of prostate Aquablation is still controversial. This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes, efficacy, feasibility, and safety of Aquablation after previous Urolift treatment.
The charts of patients with benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) complicated by storage and voiding symptoms, who were previously treated with Urolift followed by Aquablation between January 2022 and July 2024, were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed for changes in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rates (Qmax), and postvoid residual volume (PVR) from baseline (pre-Aquablation) to the mean of three months postoperatively. Day-case surgery was performed in 75% of the cases.
The study included 40 patients with a mean age of 68 (SD ± 8.91) years with moderately enlarged prostates (mean volume 81.56 mL, (SD ± 25.32), and median PSA 3.2 ng/dL). Five patients were presented initially with an indwelling Foley catheter, so their data were not included in the statistical analysis. After Aquablation, the mean IPSS improved from 24.7 (SD ± 7.63) at baseline to 9.8 (SD ± 2.55) (p < 0.0001), the mean Qmax increased from 9.6mL/sec (SD ± 5.76) at baseline to 20.8mL/sec (SD ± 6.28) (p < 0.0001), and the mean PVR decreased from 143mL (SD ± 104.89) at baseline to 36mL (SD ± 30.63 ) (p < 0.0001). The hospital stay for patients admitted ranged from 1 to 2 days. Moreover, there were no major intraoperative difficulties removing dislodged Urolift clips with a loop resectoscope at the end of the procedure, while non-dislodged clips were left in situ. None of the patients had postoperative bleeding that required hospital admission or blood transfusion following discharge.
Based on these results, prostate Aquablation appeared to be an effective, safe, feasible, and reliable surgical procedure for BPH patients who have had previous Urolift treatment. Further prospective and larger scale studies are needed.
既往Urolift治疗对前列腺水消融术结局的影响仍存在争议。这项回顾性队列研究旨在评估既往接受Urolift治疗后行前列腺水消融术的围手术期结局、疗效、可行性和安全性。
回顾性分析2022年1月至2024年7月间既往接受Urolift治疗后行前列腺水消融术的良性前列腺增生(BPH)合并储尿和排尿症状患者的病历,分析国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、最大尿流率(Qmax)和残余尿量(PVR)从基线(水消融术前)到术后三个月均值的变化。75%的病例采用日间手术。
该研究纳入40例平均年龄68(标准差±8.91)岁的患者,前列腺中度增大(平均体积81.56 mL,标准差±25.32),前列腺特异抗原(PSA)中位数为3.2 ng/dL。5例患者最初留置了Foley导尿管,因此他们的数据未纳入统计分析。水消融术后,平均IPSS从基线时的24.7(标准差±7.63)改善至9.8(标准差±2.55)(p<0.0001),平均Qmax从基线时的9.6mL/秒(标准差±5.76)增至20.8mL/秒(标准差±6.28)(p<0.0001),平均PVR从基线时的143mL(标准差±104.89)降至36mL(标准差±30.63)(p<0.0001)。入院患者的住院时间为1至2天。此外,在手术结束时用环形电切镜取出移位的Urolift夹子时,术中没有出现重大困难,而未移位的夹子则留在原位。没有患者术后出血需要住院治疗或出院后输血。
基于这些结果,对于既往接受过Urolift治疗的BPH患者,前列腺水消融术似乎是一种有效、安全、可行且可靠的手术方法。需要进一步开展前瞻性、更大规模的研究。