%0 Journal Article
%T Thirty versus 60-Watt thulium laser enucleation of prostate: Toward the development of low-power anatomical enucleation of the prostate.
%A Omar M
%A Abdullah MM
%A Moustafa A
%A Sultan S
%J Urol Ann
%V 16
%N 2
%D 2024 Apr-Jun
%M 38818432
暂无%R 10.4103/ua.ua_159_22
%X <B>UNASSIGNED: </B>We aimed to study whether using 30 W versus 60 W thulium enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) would affect postoperative outcomes in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).<BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>We prospectively identified male patients with moderate or severe lower urinary tract symptoms due to BPH. We randomized patients into 30 W (Group 1) or 60 W (Group 2) thulium yag laser with a 550 μm laser fiber and a 26 Fr continuous flow resectoscope. We collected data related to prostate size, enucleation time, morcellation time, laser time, perioperative complications, and 1-year functional outcomes.<BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>A total of 120 patients were included, with a mean age of 67 years and a mean prostate size of 105 g. The preoperative characteristics were similar across both groups. The mean operative time was shorter in the 60 W group, 74 ± 27 vs. 91 ± 33 min in the 30 W group (P = 0.001), and the mean laser time was 55 ± 20 in 60 W versus 71 ± 25 in 30 W (P = 0.0001). The mean hospital stay was 1 day in both groups and at 1-year follow-up; there was a similar improvement in mean Qmax and International Prostate Symptom Score symptom scores.<BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>Both 30 and 60 W ThuLEP provided a safe and comparable outcome with a relatively shorter operative time for the 60 W groups. Perhaps using a 30-W setting would be beneficial in the early learning curve or cases with more bleeding capsular perforators; besides, the financial benefit of manufacturing low-cost low-power devices that may help in the widespread of AEEP.