OBJECTIVE: We aim to report here the first clinical series of patients treated with AEEP using a novel hybrid thulium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Tm:YAG) laser generator (RevoLix HTL, LISA Laser Products, Germany), i.e. capable of emitting both in pulsated and continuous-wave.
METHODS: We included 39 consecutive patients who underwent hybrid Tm:YAG AEEP (hybrid ThuLEP) at a single center starting from July 2022 and were followed-up until 3 months after surgery. Complete baseline, intraoperative, and follow-up demographic and clinical data were collected. The International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS) questionnaire was used to quantify urinary symptoms at baseline and during follow-up. Post-operative follow-up further included a PSA test, uroflowmetry with post-void residual volume (PVR) measurement. Clavien-Dindo classification was used to classify complications.
RESULTS: Median (IQR) age at surgery and prostate volume were 68 (IQR 63-74) years and 85 (60-105) cc. Both en-bloc or two-lobes technique enucleation were performed according to the intraoperative and endoscopic anatomy, with a median operative time of 85 (63-108) minutes. Bladder catheter was removed in all cases on postoperative day two. Intraoperative bleeding requiring conversion to bipolar enucleation was observed in two patients. After discharge, one patient developed arm phlebitis which was treated with anticoagulants leading to new onset haematuria requiring short term catheterisation (Clavien-Dindo grade II) and two more patients had a single episode of acute urinary retention (Clavien-Dindo grade I). Median pre- vs postoperative Qmax and IPSS were 8.0 (7.0-9.4) vs. 25.0 (22.5-32.5) ml/s and 22 (20-28) vs. 1 (0-2), whereas PVR decreased from 70 (50-115) to 0 (0-26) ml.
CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid ThuLEP is a feasible and effective surgical procedure for the management of benign prostatic obstruction.

UNASSIGNED: 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).
UNASSIGNED: 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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.
UNASSIGNED: 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.

UNASSIGNED: Anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) provides durable management for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to large-sized prostate over other surgical modalities. We aimed to assess the early outcomes of Collins knife-assisted bipolar enucleation (BipolEP) versus Thulium-Yag enucleation (ThuLEP) in a group of patients with LUTS secondary to a prostate larger than 80 grams.
UNASSIGNED: We included patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) having a prostate volume > 80 grams, international prostate symptom score (IPSS) >7, urine flow (Q-max) <15, and post-void residual (PVR)>150 ml. We excluded those with a history of previous prostatic surgery, stone, or neurogenic bladder. Bipolar enucleation with early apical release was performed using Collins knife at an 80/100-watt setting (Lamidey Noury), while ThuLEP was conducted using 550- micron fiber and 40/15-watt energy (Lisa Laser). Patients were evaluated before then 2 weeks and 3, 6,12 months postoperatively for changes in IPSS, Q- max, PVR, and the incidence of stress incontinence.
UNASSIGNED: One hundred and twenty patients were equally randomized with a mean prostate size of 104 ± 25 gram. The mean IPSS score was 25 ± 6, Qmax 7.6 ± 1.3 mL/S, and PVR 225 ± 39. There was no significant difference regarding enucleation time, morcellation time, and enucleated tissue volume. Irrigation volume and post-operative hemoglobin drop were significantly lower in the bipolar group (p = 0.008, p = 0.0002), respectively. At the third-month follow-up, IPSS, Q-max, and PVR were comparable across both groups, with stress incontinence at 3.3% in the bipolar group versus 1.6% in the thulium group, showing an insignificant difference (p = 0.5).\"
UNASSIGNED: Both BipolEP and ThuLEP, with early apical release, provide a safe and effective management of large-size prostate resulting in significant decrease in post-operative stress incontinence incidence during early follow-up. Intraoperative irrigation saline volume, and post-operative hemoglobin drop favored the bipolar group.

BACKGROUND: Laser anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (LAEEP) has emerged as a promising new approach in endoscopic surgery for BPH. LAEEP could still result in ejaculatory dysfunction.
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to examine the impact of LAEEP on male ejaculatory functions.
METHODS: The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, and 15 records were included. Outcomes of interest included ejaculatory dysfunction (retrograde ejaculation, painful ejaculation, etc.) and validated questionnaire scores. The quality of studies included in the systematic review was determined using QUADAS scoring.
RESULTS: We retrieved data for 1877 men in 15 clinical studies investigating LAEEP surgery and reporting EjD rates. While only three of the obtained studies were on thulium fiber (ThuLEP), the rest were on holmium (HoLEP). The definition of \"Ejaculatory Dysfunction\" was not standardized, but in most works, it is referred to as retrograde ejaculation (RE). There were no data on the relationship between other LAEEP techniques and ejaculation functions. The authors compared the outcomes of used standard laser enucleation techniques with the modified techniques. The RE rate in LAEEP was 62.1 ± 25.1%, 71.3 ± 16.1% in standard techniques, and 27.2 ± 18.1% in ejaculation-preserving modified techniques (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrated that ejaculation-preserving techniques, i.e., modified techniques are superior to standard techniques. Studies have also shown that ejaculatory dysfunction rates gradually decrease with long-term follow-ups. Future well-designed studies could further investigate the ejaculation-preserving modification of LAEEP techniques and how they impact EjD rates and other sexual function outcomes.

In 2022, endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) is the treatment of choice for benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) for glands >80 ml and is a valid alternative for patients with bleeding disorders. Unlike robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, EEP has no additional access-related trauma and can be performed using the same instruments as for bipolar enucleoresection. With favorable costs, EEP can serve as a global solution for BPO treatment.

BACKGROUND: We conducted this cohort study to assess the differences in the learning curve of bipolar transurethral plasma enucleation of the prostate (B-TUEP) associated with prostatic peripheral zone thickness (PZT) under MRI quantitative measurements.
METHODS: For the study, 60 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) were involved. PZT are defined as \"Thin\" (<7 mm), \"Thick\" (>10 mm), and \"Medium\" (in between), with 20 patients in each group. Learning stages were defined as Group 1 (No. 1-20), Group 2 (No. 21-40), and Group 3 (No. 41-60). We measured parameters of the prostate, such as PZT and transitional zone thickness (TZT), with MRI. A learner with no experience in enucleation performed the operations. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the differences. Pearson correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis evaluated the relationship between characteristics of patients. P < 0.05 was deemed statistically significant.
RESULTS: One-Way ANOVA revealed different enucleation efficiency (0.811 ± 0.18 vs. 0.748 ± 0.14 vs. 0.634 ± 0.16), prostate volume (58.9 ± 15.33 vs. 57.3 ± 15.58 vs. 46.6 ± 14.10), and thickness of transition zone (44.45 ± 7.60 vs. 42.45 ± 6.08 vs. 34.78 ± 6.04) among Thin, Medium, and Thick groups. The enucleation efficiency is different between groups divided by learning stages (Group 1 vs. Group 3, 0.658 vs. 0.783; Group 2 vs. Group 3, 0.751 vs. 0.783). Pearson correlation analysis reveals that PZT was negatively correlated with prostate volume (r = -0.427), resection weight (r = -0.35), enucleation efficiency (r = -0.445), and TZT (r = -0.533), and was positively correlated with Q-max (r = 0.301) and bladder outlet obstruction index (BOOI) (r = 0.388). The regression coefficients of PZT, TZT, prostate volume, and Q-max were -0.012, 0.008, 0.007, and 0.013, respectively (all P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Lower PZT is independent of higher enucleation efficiency, larger adenoma, and higher TZT. PZT may be an important factor on the learning curve of B-TUEP. Higher TZT, prostate volume. and Q-max may also relate to higher enucleation efficiency. For B-TUEP learners, it seems easier to perform the operation when the PZT is low, though more care should be taken with the capsule perforation. Further, the capsule plane should be maintained more attentively if the PZT is high.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency and efficacy of HoLEP, and methods of tissue retrieval, in patients with prostate volume (PV) ≥ 200 cc (Group 1) and to compare these to patients with PV 80-199 cc (Group 2).
METHODS: A database of all cases performed under the care of two surgeons at a tertiary HoLEP centre was reviewed.
RESULTS: 157 patients with PV ≥ 200 cc were compared to 157 of the most recent consecutive cases with PV 80-199 cc. Median (IQR) enucleation efficiency was greater in Group 1 [2.8 g/min (2.2-3.5)] than Group 2 [2.1 g/min (1.6-2.5), p < 0.001]. Morcellation efficiency did not differ significantly. Cystotomy was required for tissue retrieval in Group 1 only (5.7%). Decrease in serum haemoglobin (Hb) was greater in Group 1 (19 g/l (30-8) vs 12 (18-3.5), p < 0.001) with a transfusion rate of 4.5% vs 1.3%, respectively (p = 0.104). Length of stay was longer in Group 1 than Group 2 (1 day (1-2) vs 1 (1-1), p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between groups in: time to and success of first trial without catheter, pre- and post-operative IPSS, Qmax and PVR, and 3 month catheter-free and urinary incontinence rates.
CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP outcomes are largely PV-independent even when PV is ≥ 200 cc, although length of stay and reduction in Hb are greater in this group. Alternatives to pure morcellation, such as cystotomy and resection of nodules, are more likely to be necessary with PV ≥ 200 cc.

OBJECTIVE: To determine catheter status within 3 months of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for acute and non-neurogenic chronic urinary retention (AUR and NNCUR), to compare short-term outcomes of HoLEP for urinary retention (UR) versus lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), and to report long-term serum creatinine (SC) after HoLEP for high-pressure chronic urinary retention (HPCUR).
METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of the first 500 consecutive HoLEP cases performed under the care of a single surgeon was analysed retrospectively. Urodynamic studies (UDS) did not play a role in the decision making process for those with UR. NNCUR was defined as painless, with post-void residual volume (PVR) greater than 300 ml in men able to void and initial catheter drainage > 1000 ml in men unable to void.
RESULTS: 280/500 (56%) were in UR: AUR (195), and NNCUR (85) including 22 with HPCUR. The UR cohort were older with higher enucleated tissue weight [median (IQR); 72 years (66-79 year) and 56 g (29.8-86.3 g)], than the LUTS cohort [70 years (64-75 year) and 38 g (18-67 g)] (p < 0.001). 98.9% with AUR and 98.8% with NNCUR were catheter-free 3 months after HoLEP. There were no significant differences in transfusion rates, hospital stay, or time to first trial without catheter (TWOC) between the LUTS and UR cohorts, nor in international prostate symptom score and quality of life scores, maximum urinary flow rate, post void residual volume or urinary incontinence at 3 months. Patients with NNCUR were less likely to pass their first TWOC (58.8%) than those with AUR (84.6%) or LUTS (87.7%), p < 0.001. None with HPCUR had a clinically significant deterioration in SC at a median of 60 months (IQR 36-82 months).
CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP has 3-month catheter-free rates in excess of 98.5% for AUR and NNCUR in patients not pre-selected by UDS. First TWOC is significantly more likely to fail after HoLEP for NNCUR than AUR or LUTS. HoLEP is a durable treatment for HPCUR and there is no need to monitor renal function to detect recurrence.

There is an increasing use of the procedure, anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate, as an alternative to conventional transurethral resection of prostate for surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. However, barriers to adoption of this procedure remain and no prior studies explored this important aspect till date. The aim of this study is to identify the predictors and barriers of surgeon-related practices in this area. The study findings may also provide valuable insight into current practice trends worldwide. To achieve the objectives, we conducted an online, cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study between 1st September 2019 and 5th October 2019 to investigate the knowledge, attitudes and practices among urologists worldwide. Our findings showed that the main barriers for adoption of the procedure were lack of mentorship, a steep learning curve, and unavailability of morcellator, bipolar or laser energy sources. Fear of urinary incontinence, bleeding and bladder injury were not major hindrance to adoption of this technique. The results also demonstrated that there will be continued increase in utility of the procedure in the future.

Anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate has been proposed as a potentially superior benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery than conventional transurethral resection of prostate. However, the learning curve of the procedure is steep, hence limiting its generalisability worldwide. In order to overcome the learning curve, a proper surgical training is extremely important. This review article discussed about various aspects of surgical training in anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate. In summary, no matter what surgical technique or energy modality you use, the principle of anatomical enucleation should be followed. When one starts to perform prostate enucleation, a 50 to 80 g prostate appears to be the \'best case\' to begin with. Mentorship is extremely important to shorten the learning curve and to prevent drastic complications from the procedure. A proficiency-based progression training programme with the use of simulation and training models should be the best way to teach and learn about prostate enucleation. Enucleation ratio efficacy is the preferred measure for assessing skill level and learning curve of prostate enucleation. Morcellation efficiency is commonly used to assess morcellation performance, but the importance of safety rather than efficiency must be emphasised.