A review of the recent evidence (2006-2008) for 532-nm photoselective laser vaporisation and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate

Naspro, Richard and Bachmann, Alexander and Gilling, Peter and Kuntz, Rainer and Madersbacher, Stephan and Montorsi, Francesco and Reich, Oliver and Stief, Christian and Vavassori, Ivano. (2009) A review of the recent evidence (2006-2008) for 532-nm photoselective laser vaporisation and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. European urology, Vol. 55, H. 6. pp. 1345-1357.

Full text not available from this repository.

Official URL: http://edoc.unibas.ch/dok/A6007445

Downloads: Statistics Overview


CONTEXT: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and 532-nm laser vaporisation of the prostate (with potassium titanyl phosphate [KTP] or lithium borate [LBO]) are promising alternatives to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and open prostatectomy (OP). OBJECTIVE: To assess safety, efficacy, and durability by analysing the most recent evidence of both techniques, aiming to identify advantages, pitfalls, and unresolved issues. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A Medline search of recently published data (2006-2008) regarding both techniques over the last 2 yr (January 2006 to September 2008) was performed using evidence obtained from randomised trials (level of evidence: 1b), well-designed controlled studies without randomisation (level of evidence: 2a), individual cohort studies (level of evidence: 2b), individual case control studies (level of evidence: 3), and case series (level of evidence: 4). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In the last 2 yr, several case-control and cohort studies have demonstrated reproducibility, safety, and efficacy of HoLEP and 80-W KTP laser vaporisation. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were available for HoLEP, two compared with TURP and two compared with OP, with follow-up <24 mo. Results confirmed general efficacy and durability of HoLEP, as compared with both standard techniques. Only two RCTs were available comparing KTP laser vaporisation with TURP with short-term follow-up, and only one RCT was available comparing KTP laser vaporisation with OP. The results confirmed the overall low perioperative morbidity of KTP laser vaporisation, although efficacy was comparable to TURP in the short term, despite a higher reoperation rate. CONCLUSIONS: Although they are at different points of maturation, KTP or LBO laser vaporisation and HoLEP are promising alternatives to both TURP and OP. Sufficient data proves HoLEP's durability for most prostate sizes at long-term follow-up; KTP laser vaporisation needs further evaluation to define the reoperation rate. Increasing the number of quality prospective RCTs with adequate follow-up is mandatory to tailor each technique to the right patient.
Faculties and Departments:03 Faculty of Medicine > Bereich Operative Fächer (Klinik) > Innere Organe > Urologie USB (Bachmann)
03 Faculty of Medicine > Departement Klinische Forschung > Bereich Operative Fächer (Klinik) > Innere Organe > Urologie USB (Bachmann)
UniBasel Contributors:Bachmann, Alexander
Item Type:Article, refereed
Article Subtype:Further Journal Contribution
Note:Publication type according to Uni Basel Research Database: Journal item
Related URLs:
Identification Number:
Last Modified:20 Jun 2014 07:56
Deposited On:20 Jun 2014 07:56

Repository Staff Only: item control page