Stellenwert der Holmium-Laserenukleation der Prostata (HoLEP) im Vergleich zur roboterassistierten transvesikalen Enukleation der Prostata (RASP): eine Propensity-Score-Matched-Analyse

Zusammenfassung

Einleitung

Untersuchung und Vergleich der klinischen Sicherheit und Effizienz der Holmium-Laserenukleation der Prostata (HoLEP) und der roboterassistierten, transvesikalen Enukleation der Prostata (RASP) zur Behandlung der benignen Prostatahyperplasie (BPH) mit großen Prostatavolumina in einem tertiären Versorgungszentrum.

Methoden

Erhoben wurden die perioperativen Daten von 39 Patienten, die zwischen 2015 und 2021 eine RASP in unserem Zentrum erhielten. Anhand des Prostatavolumens, des Patientenalters und des Body-Mass-Indexes (BMI) erfolgte ein Propensity Score Matching mit 721 mittels HoLEP an unserer Klinik behandelten Patienten. Präoperative Parameter wie Prostatavolumen, Alter, BMI, PSA-Wert, IPSS-Score, IIEF-Score sowie intra- und postoperative Parameter wie Operationszeit, Resektionsgewicht, postoperative Katheterliegedauer, Krankenhausverweildauer, Hämoglobinabfall, Transfusionsrate, postoperative Harnverhaltung, Clavien-Dindo-Klassifikation (CDC) und der Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) wurden ausgewertet.

Ergebnisse

Es zeigte sich ein statistisch signifikanter Unterschied zugunsten der HoLEP hinsichtlich der Operationszeit (114,5 vs. 153,5 Minuten; p<0,001), der Katheterliegedauer (2,6 vs. 7,4 Tage; p<0,001) und der Krankenhausverweildauer (2,9 vs. 8,8 Tage; p<0,001). Hinsichtlich des Hämoglobinabfalls und der Transfusionsrate konnte kein statistisch signifikanter Unterschied nachgewiesen werden. Die Rate der Komplikationen war niedriger nach der HoLEP, jedoch nicht statistisch signifikant (p=0,051). In Bezug auf den Schweregrad der Komplikationen zeigte sich ein statistisch signifikanter Unterschied der CDC zuungunsten der RASP (p=0,027), der CCI wies jedoch keinen statistisch signifikanten Unterschied zwischen beiden Kohorten auf (p=0,098).

Schlussfolgerung

Sowohl HoLEP als auch RASP waren effektiv und sicher bei der Behandlung der BPH mit großem Prostatavolumina. Die HoLEP zeigte im Vergleich zu RASP Vorteile bei der Katheterisierungsdauer sowie der Krankenhausaufenthaltsdauer. Bezüglich der Rate an Komplikationen zeigten sich keine statistisch signifikanten Unterschiede.

Abstract

Introduction

This study investigates and compares the clinical safety and efficiency of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and robot-assisted transvesical enucleation of the prostate (RASP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with large prostate volumes in a tertiary care centre.

Methods

Perioperative data were collected from 39 patients who underwent RASP at our centre between 2015 and 2021. Propensity score matching was performed based on prostate volume, patient age, and body mass index (BMI), comparing these patients with 721 individuals treated with HoLEP at our clinic. An analysis was performed of preoperative parameters, including prostate volume, age, BMI, PSA level, IPSS score, and IIEF score, as well as intra- and postoperative parameters, including operative time, resected tissue weight, postoperative catheterization duration, length of hospital stay, haemoglobin decrease, transfusion rate, postoperative urinary retention, Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC), and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI).

Results

A statistically significant advantage was observed in favour of HoLEP regarding operative time (114.5 vs. 153.5 minutes; p<0.001), catheterization duration (2.6 vs. 7.4 days; p<0.001), and length of hospital stay (2.9 vs. 8.8 days; p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was found in terms of haemoglobin decrease or transfusion rate. The overall complication rate was lower in the HoLEP group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.051). However, regarding the severity of complications, a statistically significant disadvantage for RASP was observed based on the CDC (p=0.027), while the CCI did not show a statistically significant difference between the cohorts (p=0.098).

Conclusion

Both HoLEP and RASP proved to be effective and safe for the treatment of BPH with large prostate volumes. Compared to RASP, HoLEP demonstrated advantages in terms of catheterization duration and length of hospital stay. No statistically significant differences were observed regarding the overall complication rate.

Schlüsselwörter

Roboter-assistierte Enukleation der Prostata - Holmium - HoLEP - endoskopische Enukleation der Prostata - Prostatahyperplasie

Keywords

Holmium - HoLEP - Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy - benign prostatic hyperplasia

Publication History

Received: 18 February 2025

Accepted after revision: 02 April 2025

Article published online:
21 May 2025

• Literatur

• 1 Coyne KS, Sexton CC, Thompson CL. et al. The prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in the USA, the UK and Sweden: results from the Epidemiology of LUTS (EpiLUTS) study. BJU Int 2009; 104: 352-360
• 2 Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A. et al. EAU Guidelines on the Assessment of Non-neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms including Benign Prostatic Obstruction. Eur Urol 2015; 67: 1099-1109
• 3 Hartung FO, Kowalewski KF, von Hardenberg J. et al. Holmium Versus Thulium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. European urology focus 2022; 8: 545-554
• 4 Placer J, Gelabert-Mas A, Vallmanya F. et al. Holmium laser enucleation of prostate: outcome and complications of self-taught learning curve. Urology 2009; 73: 1042-1048
• 5 Robert G, Cornu JN, Fourmarier M. et al. Multicentre prospective evaluation of the learning curve of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). BJU Int 2016; 117: 495-499
• 6 Wei HB, Guo BY, Tu YF. et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of transurethral laser versus open prostatectomy for patients with large-sized benign prostatic hyperplasia: A meta-analysis of comparative trials. Investig Clin Urol 2022; 63: 262-272
• 7 Sotelo R, Clavijo R, Carmona O. et al. Robotic simple prostatectomy. The Journal of urology 2008; 179: 513-515
• 8 Johnson B, Sorokin I, Singla N. et al. Determining the Learning Curve for Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy in Surgeons Familiar with Robotic Surgery. J Endourol 2018; 32: 865-870
• 9 Umari P, Fossati N, Gandaglia G. et al. Robotic Assisted Simple Prostatectomy versus Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Patients with Large Volume Prostate: A Comparative Analysis from a High Volume Center. J Urol 2017; 197: 1108-1114
• 10 Zhang MW, El Tayeb MM, Borofsky MS. et al. Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate and Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy. J Endourol 2017; 31: 847-850
• 11 Nestler S, Bach T, Herrmann T. et al. Surgical treatment of large volume prostates: a matched pair analysis comparing the open, endoscopic (ThuVEP) and robotic approach. World J Urol 2019; 37: 1927-1931
• 12 Fuschi A, Al Salhi Y, Velotti G. et al. Holmium laser enucleation of prostate versus minimally invasive simple prostatectomy for large volume (≥120 ml) prostate glands: a prospective multicenter randomized study. Minerva Urol Nefrol 2021; 73: 638-648
• 13 Kowalewski KF, Hartung FO, von Hardenberg J. et al. Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy vs Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Trials. Journal of endourology 2022; 36: 1018-1028
• 14 Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML. et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 2009; 250: 187-196
• 15 Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J. et al. The comprehensive complication index: a novel continuous scale to measure surgical morbidity. Ann Surg 2013; 258: 1-7
• 16 Saitta G, Becerra JEA, Del Alamo JF. et al. 'En Bloc' HoLEP with early apical release in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. World J Urol 2019; 37: 2451-2458
• 17 Ho D, Imai K, King G. et al. Package ‘MatchIt’. Version. 2018
• 18 Team RC . R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/ 2018
• 19 Palacios DA, Kaouk J, Abou Zeinab M. et al. Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate vs Transvesical Single-port Robotic Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostatic Glands. Urology 2023; 181: 98-104
• 20 Van der Jeugt J, Umari P, Mottaran A. et al. Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate vs Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Patients with Extremely Large Prostates ≥200 cc: A Comparative Analysis. J Endourol 2023; 37: 895-902
• 21 Grosso AA, Amparore D, Di Maida F. et al. Comparison of perioperative and short-terms outcomes of en-bloc Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: a propensity-score matching analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024; 27: 478-484
• 22 Choudhary MK, Kolanukuduru KP, Eraky A. et al. Comparative Outcomes of En-Bloc Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate and Transvesical Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy for the Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Propensity-Matched Analysis. Journal of endourology 2025; 39: 57-63
• 23 John H, Wagner C, Padevit C. et al. From open simple to robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) for large benign prostate hyperplasia: the time has come. World journal of urology 2021; 39: 2329-2336
• 24 Agarwal DK, Large T, Tong Y. et al. Same Day Discharge is a Successful Approach for the Majority of Patients Undergoing Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate. European urology focus 2022; 8: 228-234
• 25 Slade A, Agarwal D, Large T. et al. Expanded Criteria Same Day Catheter Removal After Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate. Journal of endourology 2022; 36: 977-981
• 26 Noureldin Y, Gupta A, Hodhod A. et al. Same-day trial of void and discharge following standard vs. MOSES(TM) holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: A single-center experience. Canadian Urological Association journal=Journal de l’Association des urologues du Canada 2023; 17: E23-E28
• 27 Hartung FO, Gruene B, Becker B. et al. Prostate Surgery for Benign Prostatic Syndrome >200 ml: Endoscopic, Robotic, or Open Approach. Aktuelle Urologie 2024; 55: 213-218