Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2020 Jul;38(7):1663-1684.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02968-4. Epub 2019 Oct 8.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of endoscopic enucleation and non-enucleation procedures for benign prostatic enlargement

Marcelo Langer Wroclawski  1 , Saulo Borborema Teles  2 , Breno Santos Amaral  2 , Paulo Priante Kayano  2 , Jonathan Doyun Cha  2 , Arie Carneiro  2 , Wladimir Alfer Jr  2 , Jose Monteiro Jr  2 , Antonio Otero Gil  2 , Gustavo Caserta Lemos  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of endoscopic enucleation and non-enucleation procedures for benign prostatic enlargement

Marcelo Langer Wroclawski et al. World J Urol. 2020 Jul.

Abstract

Introduction and objective: This study aims to evaluate safety and efficacy of different endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) techniques, by comparing laser (L-EEP) and non-laser (NL-EEP) procedures; and EEP versus other endoscopic non-enucleation (ENE) surgeries for benign prostatic enlargement (BPE).

Methods: A systematic literature review was performed for randomized clinical trials (RCT) that compared different endoscopic treatments for BPE, between 1982 and 2018. Two analyses were performed: (1) EEP versus ENE; and (2) L-EEP versus NL-EEP. Efficacy was assessed using perioperative data (removed tissue volume, operation time (OT), catheterization time, length of hospital stay); and functional outcomes [IPSS, IIEF-5, maximum flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual volume (PVR), quality of life (QoL)]. Safety was assessed through complications (Hb and sodium decrease, transfusion rate). Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan® 5.3.

Results: Out of 35 RCTs (4066 patients), 31 (3909 patients) evaluated EEP versus ENE, and 4 (327 patients) evaluated L-EEP versus NL-EEP. EEP presented greater Qmax. Also, EEP presented less catheterization time, length of hospital stay, Hb decrease, transfusion rate. OT and bladder injury were greater with EEP. There were no significant differences between other items. L-EEP removed more tissue volume, with a smaller drop in serum Hb. There were no significant differences in other perioperative data, functional outcomes, complications.

Conclusions: EEP and ENE are effective and safe for treating BPE. Perioperative data favors EEP. Statistical differences, with questionable clinical significance in functional outcomes and complication rates were encountered. L-EEP provides greater tissue removal and smaller Hb decrease then NL-EEP, with similar functional profiles.

Keywords: Endoscopic surgical procedures; Outcomes assessments; Prostate.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources