Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Urology
Published in: World Journal of Urology 4/2015

01-04-2015 | Topic Paper

Bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate: ready to replace GreenLight? A systematic review of randomized control trials

Authors: Grégoire Robert, Alexandre de la Taille, Thomas Herrmann

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 4/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and open surgery remain associated with significant morbidity in contemporary series and are constantly challenged by new endoscopic treatments. Our aim was to conduce a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy and safety of bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate (BPVP) in the management of bladder outlet obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Evidence acquisition

A MEDLINE database search was performed, and a list of relevant publications was established with the consensus of all authors. RCTs comparing BPVP to any other kind of surgical treatment were included. All studies assessing hybrid techniques (combination with bipolar resection or bipolar vaporization) were excluded. The end points were functional outcomes and treatment-related adverse events.

Evidence synthesis

Seven different RCTs including a total of 1,071 study participants were selected. BPVP had superior hemostatic efficiency as compared to TURP resulting in shorter catheterization time (42.5 vs. 77.5 h) and shorter hospital stay (3.1 vs. 4.4 days). BPVP also had slightly better short-term functional outcomes as compared to TURP (mean IPSS at follow-up: 5.7 vs. 8.3).

Conclusion

Selected RCTs were suggesting a better hemostatic efficiency of the BPVP as compared to TURP and similar short-term functional outcomes. But due to the lack of multicentric data and to the fact that most of the published studies had been conducted in one single institution, BPVP may not be recommended as an alternative to TURP in everyday practice.
Literature
1.
Oelke M, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A, Emberton M, Gravas S, Michel MC et al (2013) EAU guidelines on the treatment and follow-up of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol 64(1):118–140CrossRefPubMed
2.
Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Seitz M, Schlenker B, Hermanek P et al (2008) Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol 180(1):246–249CrossRefPubMed
3.
Serretta V, Morgia G, Fondacaro L, Curto G, Lo bianco A, Pirritano D et al (2002) Open prostatectomy for benign prostatic enlargement in southern Europe in the late 1990s: a contemporary series of 1800 interventions. Urology 60(4):623–627CrossRefPubMed
4.
Kaplan SA, Te AE (1995) Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate: a novel method for treating men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 45(4):566–572CrossRefPubMed
5.
Moreno JG, Hirsch IH, Gomella LG, Bagley DH (1995) New prostatectomy technique: transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate. Tech Urol 1(2):62–66PubMed
6.
Botto H, Lebret T, Barre P, Orsoni JL, Herve JM, Lugagne PM (2001) Electrovaporization of the prostate with the Gyrus device. J Endourol/Endourol Soc 15(3):313–316CrossRef
7.
Dunsmuir WD, McFarlane JP, Tan A, Dowling C, Downie J, Kourambas J et al (2003) Gyrus bipolar electrovaporization vs transurethral resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective single-blind trial with 1 y follow-up. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 6(2):182–186CrossRefPubMed
8.
Karaman MI, Kaya C, Ozturk M, Gurdal M, Kirecci S, Pirincci N (2005) Comparison of transurethral vaporization using PlasmaKinetic energy and transurethral resection of prostate: 1-year follow-up. Journal of endourology/Endourological Society. 19(6):734–737CrossRefPubMed
9.
Hon NH, Brathwaite D, Hussain Z, Ghiblawi S, Brace H, Hayne D et al (2006) A prospective, randomized trial comparing conventional transurethral prostate resection with PlasmaKinetic vaporization of the prostate: physiological changes, early complications and long-term followup. The Journal of urology. 176(1):205–209CrossRefPubMed
10.
Geavlete B, Multescu R, Dragutescu M, Jecu M, Georgescu D, Geavlete P (2010) Transurethral resection (TUR) in saline plasma vaporization of the prostate vs standard TUR of the prostate: ‘the better choice’ in benign prostatic hyperplasia? BJU international. 106(11):1695–1699CrossRefPubMed
11.
Nuhoglu B, Balci MB, Aydin M, Hazar I, Onuk O, Tas T et al (2011) The role of bipolar transurethral vaporization in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urol Int 87(4):400–404CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zhang SY, Hu H, Zhang XP, Wang D, Xu KX, Na YQ et al (2012) Efficacy and safety of bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate with “button-type” electrode compared with transurethral resection of prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Chin Med J 125(21):3811–3814PubMed
13.
Geavlete B, Georgescu D, Multescu R, Stanescu F, Jecu M, Geavlete P (2011) Bipolar plasma vaporization vs monopolar and bipolar TURP-A prospective, randomized, long-term comparison. Urology. 78(4):930–935CrossRefPubMed
14.
Thangasamy IA, Chalasani V, Bachmann A, Woo HH (2012) Photoselective vaporisation of the prostate using 80-W and 120-W laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review with meta-analysis from 2002 to 2012. Eur Urol 62(2):315–323CrossRefPubMed
15.
Bachmann A, Tubaro A, Barber N, d’Ancona F, Muir G, Witzsch U et al (2014) 180-W XPS GreenLight laser vaporisation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: 6-month safety and efficacy results of a European Multicentre Randomised Trial–the Goliath study. Eur Urol 65(5):931–942CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate: ready to replace GreenLight? A systematic review of randomized control trials
Authors
Grégoire Robert
Alexandre de la Taille
Thomas Herrmann
Publication date
01-04-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 4/2015
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-014-1384-4

Other articles of this Issue 4/2015

World Journal of Urology 4/2015 Go to the issue

Original Article

Long-term results of thulium laser resection of the prostate: a prospective study at multiple centers

Topic Paper

Current evidence on lasers in laparoscopy: partial nephrectomy

Topic Paper

Update on the current evidence for Tm:YAG vapoenucleation of the prostate 2014

Topic Paper

Update on the use of diode laser in the management of benign prostate obstruction in 2014

Topic Paper

Transurethral anatomical enucleation of the prostate with Tm:YAG support (ThuLEP): review of the literature on a novel surgical approach in the management of benign prostatic enlargement

Letter to the Editor

T. R. W. Herrmann and T. Bach (eds.): Editorial comment on “What is relevant for Lasers in Urology?”