Analysis of Urinary Retention After Endoscopic Prostate Enucleation and Its Subsequent Impact on Surgical Outcomes

Overview

Journal World J Urol

Specialty Urology

Date 2024 May 9

PMID 38724829

Authors

Ying-Hao Hsu

Chen-Pang Hou

Shu-Chuan Weng

Han-Yu Tsai

Shu-Han Tsao

Horng-Heng Juang

Yu-Hsiang Lin

Chien-Lun Chen

Phei-Lang Chang

Kuo-Jen Lin

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Postoperative urinary retention (PUR) is a common complication after prostate enucleation, which leads to an increased length of hospital stay and decreased postoperative satisfaction. This study determined the predictive factors of postoperative urine retention within 1 month after prostate enucleation and investigated whether PUR influences surgical outcomes at the 2-week, 3-month, and 6-month follow-up time points.

Methods: Data were collected from the electronic medical records of 191 patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) during October 2018 to September 2021. Of them, 180 patients who underwent thulium laser or plasma kinetic enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP, PKEP) were separated into the PUR group (n = 24) and the non-PUR (NPUR) group (n = 156). Uroflowmetry and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaire were followed up at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively.

Results: The PUR group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) than the NPUR group. Postoperatively, compared with the NPUR group, the PUR group had significantly less improvement in changes in the IPSS Quality of Life scores at 2 weeks, the total IPSS(International Prostate Symptom Score) at all follow-up times, the IPSS-S(IPSS storage subscores) at 2 weeks and 3 months, and the IPSS-V(IPSS voiding subscores) at all follow-up times. Predictive factors for PUR include lower preoperative maximum urinary flow (Qmax), lower preoperative total IPSS, and higher operation time.

Conclusion: Lower preoperative Qmax, lower IPSS scores, and longer operation time were risk factors for PUR. Furthermore, PUR could be a prognostic factor for prostatic enucleation surgical outcomes.

References

Lim K . Epidemiology of clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia. Asian J Urol. 2017; 4(3):148-151. PMC: 5717991. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajur.2017.06.004. View

Lerner L, McVary K, Barry M, Bixler B, Dahm P, Das A . Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Attributed to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: AUA GUIDELINE PART II-Surgical Evaluation and Treatment. J Urol. 2021; 206(4):818-826. DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002184. View

Cornu J . Bipolar, Monopolar, Photovaporization of the Prostate, or Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: How to Choose What's Best?. Urol Clin North Am. 2016; 43(3):377-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2016.04.006. View

Li M, Qiu J, Hou Q, Wang D, Huang W, Hu C . Endoscopic enucleation versus open prostatectomy for treating large benign prostatic hyperplasia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2015; 10(3):e0121265. PMC: 4380430. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121265. View

Chen S, Zhu L, Cai J, Zheng Z, Ge R, Wu M . Plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate compared with open prostatectomy for prostates larger than 100 grams: a randomized noninferiority controlled trial with long-term results at 6 years. Eur Urol. 2014; 66(2):284-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.010. View

Feng L, Zhang D, Tian Y, Song J . Thulium Laser Enucleation Versus Plasmakinetic Enucleation of the Prostate: A Randomized Trial of a Single Center. J Endourol. 2016; 30(6):665-70. DOI: 10.1089/end.2015.0867. View

Neill M, Gilling P, Kennett K, Frampton C, Westenberg A, Fraundorfer M . Randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of prostate with plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 2006; 68(5):1020-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.06.021. View

Lin Y, Wu X, Xu A, Ren R, Zhou X, Wen Y . Transurethral enucleation of the prostate versus transvesical open prostatectomy for large benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Urol. 2015; 34(9):1207-19. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-015-1735-9. View

Yang C, Chen G, Wu Y, Zhang W, Wang J, Chen P . Clinical efficacy and complications of transurethral resection of the prostate versus plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate. Eur J Med Res. 2023; 28(1):83. PMC: 9938974. DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-00989-9. View

10.

Tsai W, Lee W, Wu P, Huang J, Chen Y, Chen S . Ratio of Transmitral E Wave Velocity to Left Atrial Strain as a Useful Predictor of Total and Cardiovascular Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients. J Clin Med. 2020; 9(1). PMC: 7019944. DOI: 10.3390/jcm9010085. View

11.

Geavlete B, Bulai C, Ene C, Checherita I, Geavlete P . Bipolar vaporization, resection, and enucleation versus open prostatectomy: optimal treatment alternatives in large prostate cases?. J Endourol. 2014; 29(3):323-31. DOI: 10.1089/end.2014.0493. View

12.

Chen Y, Lin W, Chow Y, Tsai W, Chen M, Chiu A . Analysis of risk factors of bladder neck contracture following transurethral surgery of prostate. BMC Urol. 2021; 21(1):59. PMC: 8037916. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-021-00831-6. View

13.

Oken M, Creech R, Tormey D, Horton J, Davis T, McFadden E . Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982; 5(6):649-55. View

14.

Oelke M, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A, Emberton M, Gravas S, Michel M . EAU guidelines on the treatment and follow-up of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol. 2013; 64(1):118-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.004. View

15.

Liu C, Zheng S, Li H, Xu K . Transurethral enucleation and resection of prostate in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia by plasma kinetics. J Urol. 2010; 184(6):2440-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.037. View

16.

Herrmann T, Bach T, Imkamp F, Georgiou A, Burchardt M, Oelke M . Thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP): transurethral anatomical prostatectomy with laser support. Introduction of a novel technique for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction. World J Urol. 2010; 28(1):45-51. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-009-0503-0. View

17.

Hahn R, Fagerstrom T, Tammela T, Van Vierssen Trip O, Beisland H, Duggan A . Blood loss and postoperative complications associated with transurethral resection of the prostate after pretreatment with dutasteride. BJU Int. 2007; 99(3):587-94. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06619.x. View

18.

Sandfeldt L, Bailey D, Hahn R . Blood loss during transurethral resection of the prostate after 3 months of treatment with finasteride. Urology. 2001; 58(6):972-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01408-x. View

19.

Fagerstrom T, Nyman C, Hahn R . Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate causes less bleeding than the monopolar technique: a single-centre randomized trial of 202 patients. BJU Int. 2009; 105(11):1560-4. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09052.x. View

20.

Togo Y, Fukui K, Ueda Y, Kanamaru S, Shimizu Y, Wada K . Comparison of single- and multiple-dose cefazolin as prophylaxis for transurethral enucleation of prostate: A multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial by the Japanese Research Group for Urinary Tract Infection. Int J Urol. 2020; 27(3):244-248. DOI: 10.1111/iju.14181. View