Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Current Surgical BPH Interventions for Young and Elderly Men

  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Benign prostatic hyperplasia affects the quality of life of a significant number of men, especially as they age. There are continuous innovations in the surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia, but many of these innovations are studied in the core population of men 50–70 years of age. This review focuses on the outliers of men aged 18–50 and 70 and older.

Recent Findings

Older populations have more comorbidities, higher rates of antithrombotic medications, and advanced symptoms. Properly selected older men can safely have significant objective and subjective improvement in their symptoms. The literature was scarce when evaluating younger men; however, ejaculatory preserving techniques are promising providing improvement in symptoms and preserving ejaculation.

Summary

This review demonstrates that in properly selected elderly patients, improvements in quality of life while also providing safe surgical interventions can be achieved. Ejaculatory preservation techniques demonstrate promising results, but further studies are required to elucidate true outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Wei JT, Calhoun E, Jacobsen SJ. Urologic diseases in America project: benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2005;173:1257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Gall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, Wein A. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(2):167–78.

  3. Baboudjian M, Peyronnet B, Boissier R, et al. Best nonsurgical managements of acute urinary retention: what’s new? Curr Opin Urol. 2022;32(2):124–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gravas S, Bach T, Drake M, Gratzke C, Hermann TR, Umbach R. EAU guidelines on nonneurogenic male LUTS including benign prostatic obstruction. Euro Assoc Urol. 2017.

  5. • Sandhu JS, Bixler BR, Dahm P, et al. Management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): AUA Guideline amendment 2023. J Urol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003698. The AUA guidelines provide an evidence-based set of foundational recommendations on the procedures that are appropriate for patients suffering from LUTS secondary to BPH. Many practicing urologists use these guidelines daily in their practice. These guidelines are continually evolving due the rapid advancements within medicine as demonstrated by the recent revision in 2023. This review incorporated these guidelines as a core component to its structure but also looked to the literature for current trends and new techniques being utilized in populations that are often on the extremes of age in many studies.

  6. Lerner LB, McVary KT, Barry MJ, et al. Management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia: AUA GUIDELINE PART II—surgical evaluation and treatment. J Urol. 2021;206(4):818–26. https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000002184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tang Y, Li J, Pu C, et al. Bipolar transurethral resection versus monopolar transurethral resection for benign prostatic hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol. 2014;28(9):1107–14. Link, Google Scholar.

  8. Bruce A, Krishan A, Sadiq S, et al. Safety and efficacy of bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate vs monopolar transurethral resection of prostate in the treatment of moderate-large volume prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol. 2021;35:663–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Young MJ, Elmussareh M, Morrison T, Wilson JR. The changing practice of transurethral resection of the prostate. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2018;100(4):326–29. https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2018.0054. Epub 2018 Mar 15. PMID: 29543050; PMCID: PMC5958867.

  10. Gormley EA, Griffiths DJ, McCracken PN, Harrison GM, McPhee MS. Effect of transurethral resection of the prostate on detrusor instability and urge incontinence in elderly males. Neurourol Urodyn. 1993;12:445–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.193012050.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Losco G, Mark S, Jowitt S. Outcome of TURP for retention. ANZ J Surg. 2013;83:243–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.12014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Abrams PH, Dunn M, George N. Urodynamic findings in chronic retention of urine and their relevance to results of surgery. Br Med J. 1978;2(6147):1258–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Djavan B, Madersbacher S, Klingler C, Marberger M. Urodynamic assessment of patients with acute urinary retention: is treatment failure after prostatectomy predictable? J Urol. 1997;158(5):1829–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Antoniou V, Edris F, Akpobire W, Voss J, Somani B. Surgical outcomes for elderly patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate for chronic urinary retention and proposal of a management algorithm. J Endourol. 2023;37(5):581–6. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2022.0654. Epub 2023 May 5 PMID: 36960708.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pirola GM, Saredi G, Codas Duarte R, Bernard L, Pacchetti A, Berti L, Martorana E, Carcano G, Badet L, Fassi-Fehri H. Holmium laser versus thulium laser enucleation of the prostate: a matched-pair analysis from two centers. Ther Adv Urol. 2018;10(8):223–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1756287218779784. PMID: 30034541; PMCID: PMC6048626.

  16. •• Yilmaz M, Esser J, Suarez-Ibarrola R, Gratzke C, Miernik A. Safety and efficacy of laser enucleation of the prostate in elderly patients - a narrative review. Clin Interv Aging. 2022;17:15–3. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S347698. PMID: 35035216; PMCID: PMC8754464. This article incorporated many of the articles we found in our search with regard to LEP procedures in the elderly population. Many of the same conclusions found within this article were reached in our search of the literature, reinforcing the validity of conclusions found in this review. It provides evidence to the efficacy and safety of LEP in the elderly populations.

  17. Savin Z, Veredgorn Y, Taha, T. et al. En bloc holmium laser enucleation of prostate in octogenarians and nonagenarians: clinical characteristics and outcome. Lasers Med Sci. 2023;38:196. https://doi-org.usu01.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10103-023-03866-3.

  18. Castellani D, Pirola GM, Gasparri L, et al. Are outcomes of thulium laser enucleation of the prostate different in men aged 75 and over? A propensity score analysis Urology. 2019;132:170–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.06.025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mmeje CO, Nunez-Nateras R, Warner JN, Humphreys MR. Age-stratified outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. BJU Int. 2013;112(7):982–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12063. Epub 2013 Mar 19 PMID: 23510326.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gild P, Lenke L, Pompe RS, et al. Assessing the outcome of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate by age, prostate volume, and a history of blood thinning agents: report from a single-center series of >1800 consecutive cases. J Endourol. 2021;35:639–46. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2020.0605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Anan G, Iwamura H, Mikami J, et al. Efficacy and safety of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for elderly patients: surgical outcomes and King’s Health Questionnaire. Transl Androl Urol. 2021;10(2):775–84. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1309.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Hou C-M, Chen C-L, Lin Y-H, Yang P-S, Chang P-L, Tsui K-H. Treatment outcomes of benign prostate hyperplasia by thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate in aging men. Urol Sci. 2016;27(4):230–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urols.2016.03.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tamalunas A, Westhofen T, Schott M, et al. The clinical value of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in octogenarians. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2021;13(2):279–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/luts.12366.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Krambeck AE, Handa SE, Lingeman JE. Experience with more than 1000 holmium laser prostate enucleations for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2013;189(1Suppl):S141–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.027

  25. Gupta N, Sivaramakrishna, Kumar R et al. Comparison of standard transurethral resection, transurethral vapour resection and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia of >40 g. BJU Int. 2006;97:85.

  26. Ahyai SA, Lehrich K, Kuntz RM. Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate: 3-year follow-up results of a randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol. 2007;52:1456.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tan AH, Gilling PJ, Kennett KM, et al. A randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate with transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands (40 to 200 grams). J Urol. 2003;170:1270.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mavuduru RM, Mandal AK, Singh SK, et al. Comparison of HoLEP and TURP in terms of efficacy in the early postoperative period and perioperative morbidity. Urol Int. 2009;82:130.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Montorsi F, Naspro R, Salonia A, et al. Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate: results from a 2-center, prospective, randomized trial in patients with obstructive benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2004;172:1926.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Christidis D, McGrath S, Perera M, Manning T, Bolton D, Lawrentschuk N. Minimally invasive surgical therapies for benign prostatic hypertrophy: the rise in minimally invasive surgical therapies. Prostate Int. 2017;5(2):41–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prnil.2017.01.007. Epub 2017 Jan 19. PMID: 28593165; PMCID: PMC5448728.

  31. Roehrborn CG, Barkin J, Gange SN, et al. Five year results of the prospective randomized controlled prostatic urethral L.I.F.T. Study. Can J Urol. 2017;24:8802.

  32. Rukstalis D, Grier D, Stroup SP, et al. Prostatic urethral lift (PUL) for obstructive median lobes: 12 month results of the MedLift Study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2019;22:411–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-018-0118-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Jung JH, Reddy B, McCutcheon KA, Borofsky M, Narayan V, Kim MH, Dahm P. Prostatic urethral lift for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;5(5):CD012832. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012832.pub2. PMID: 31128077; PMCID: PMC6535104.

  34. Lehner K, Popat S, Utech K, Taylor J, Brooks M, Jones J. Outcomes of prostatic urethral lift in a medically complex population at a veterans affairs hospital. BJUI Compass. 2021;3(3):214–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/bco2.126.PMID:35492222;PMCID:PMC9045564.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. McNicholas TA, Woo HH, Chin PT, et al. Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift: surgical technique and multinational experience. Eur Urol. 2013;64:292–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cantwell AL, Bogache WK, Richardson SF, et al. Multicentre prospective crossover study of the ‘prostatic urethral lift’ for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int. 2014;113:615–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Westwood J, Geraghty R, Jones P, Rai BP, Somani BK. Rezum: a new transurethral water vapour therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Ther Adv Urol. 2018;10(11):327–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1756287218793084.PMID:30344644;PMCID:PMC6180381.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, et al. Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP): incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol. 2006;50:969–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Tadrist, A, Baboudjian, M, Bah, MB. et al. Water vapor thermal therapy for indwelling urinary catheter removal in frail patients. Int Urol Nephrol. 2023;55:249–53. https://doi-org.usu01.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s11255-022-03408-w.

  40. Gilling PJ, Barber N, Bidair M, et al. Randomized controlled trial of aquablation versus transurethral resection of the prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia: One-year outcomes. Urology. 2019;125:169.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M, et al. Three-year outcomes after aquablation therapy compared to TURP: results from a blinded randomized trial. Can J Urol. 2020;27:10072.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M, et al. WATER: a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of Aquablation(®) vs transurethral resection of the prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2018;199:1252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Plante M, Gilling P, Barber N, et al. Symptom relief and anejaculation after aquablation or transurethral resection of the prostate: subgroup analysis from a blinded randomized trial. BJU Int. 2019;123:651.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Raizenne BL, Bouhadana D, Zorn KC, Barber N, Gilling P, Kaplan S, Badlani G, Chughtai B, Elterman D, Bhojani N. Functional and surgical outcomes of Aquablation in elderly men. World J Urol. 2022;40(10):2515–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04137-6. Epub 2022 Aug 30 PMID: 36040501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Rieken M, Bachmann A. Laser treatment of benign prostate enlargement-which laser for which prostate. Nat Rev Urol. 2014;11(3):142–52. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2014.23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bouhadana D, Nguyen DD, Zhang X, et al. Safety and efficacy of TURP vs. laser prostatectomy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia in multi-morbid and elderly individuals aged ≥ 75. World J Urol. 2021;39(12):4405–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-021-03779-2

  47. Stoddard MD, Zheng X, Mao J, Te A, Sedrakyan A, Chughtai B. Safety and efficacy of outpatient surgical procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement in New York state and California (2005–2016). J Urol. 2021;205(3):848–54. https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000001401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Lai S, Peng P, Diao T, et al. Comparison of photoselective green light laser vaporisation versus traditional transurethral resection for benign prostate hyperplasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and prospective studies. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e028855. https://doi-org.usu01.idm.oclc.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028855.

  49. Thomas JA, Tubaro A, Barber N, et al. A multicenter randomized noninferiority trial comparing GreenLight-XPS laser vaporization of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: two-yr outcomes of the GOLIATH study. Eur Urol. 2016;69:94–2. https://doi-org.usu01.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.054.

  50. Nguyen DD, Deyirmendjian C, Law K, et al. GreenLight photovaporization of the prostate in high-medical-risk patients: an analysis of the Global GreenLight Group (GGG) database. World J Urol. 2022;40(7):1755–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-03986-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Rajih E, Tholomier C, Hueber PA, et al. Evaluation of surgical outcomes with photoselective GreenLight XPS laser vaporization of the prostate in high medical risk men with benign prostatic enlargement: a multicenter study. J Endourol. 2017;31(7):686–93. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0782.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Majumdar R, Mirheydar HS, Palazzi KL, Lakin CM, Albo ME, Parsons JK. Prostate laser vaporization is safe and effective in elderly men. Urol Ann. 2015;7(1):36–40. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-7796.148595.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Carnevale FC, McClure T, Cadour F, Vidal V, de Assis AM, Moreira AM, Rocha ADD, Rebet A, Nutting C. Advanced image guidance for prostatic artery embolization - a multicenter technical note. CVIR Endovasc. 2021;4(1):63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42155-021-00249-z.PMID:34374875;PMCID:PMC8355292.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. A Pereira J, Bilhim T, Duarte M, Rio Tinto H, Fernandes L, Martins Pisco J. Patient selection and counseling before prostatic arterial embolization. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012;154270–275.

  55. Carnevale F C, Antunes A A. Prostatic artery embolization for enlarged prostates due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. How I do it. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013;36(6):1452–63

  56. Pisco JM, Rio TH, Campos PL, Bilhim T, Duarte M, Fernandes L. Embolization of prostatic arteries as treatment of moderate to severe lower urinary symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign hyperplasia: results of short- and mid-term follow-up. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:2561–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Antunes AA, Carnevale FC, da Motta L, Filho JM, et al. Clinical, laboratorial, and urodynamic findings of prostatic artery embolization for the treatment of urinary retention related to benign prostatic hyperplasia. A prospective single-center pilot study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013;36(4):978–86.

  58. Bilhim T, Costa NV, Torres D, Pinheiro LC, Spaepen E. Long-term outcome of prostatic artery embolization for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: single-centre retrospective study in 1072 patients over a 10-year period. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2022;45(9):1324–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-022-03199-8. Epub 2022 Jul 1 PMID: 35778579.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Xu C, Zhang G, Wang JJ, Zhou CX, Jiang MJ. Safety and efficacy of prostatic artery embolization for large benign prostatic hyperplasia in elderly patients. J Int Med Res. 2021;49(1):300060520986284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060520986284.PMID:33499701;PMCID:PMC7844465.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Wang MQ, Wang Y, Yan JY, Yuan K, Zhang GD, Duan F, Li K. Prostatic artery embolization for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia in men ≥75 years: a prospective single-center study. World J Urol. 2016;34(9):1275–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1771-0. Epub 2016 Jan 27 PMID: 26818021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. •• Bilhim T. Long-term PAE results: what do we know. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2022;39(6):577–80. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1759732. PMID: 36561801; PMCID: PMC9767787. Bilhim et al. have shown that one of the main flaws is short-term outcomes reported in the literature for PAE. The durability of these procedures was unknown when they first emerged, and many urologists questioned the durability and efficacy of long-term PAE outcomes. This article has highlighted that these procedures may have their limitations regarding durability with waning objective outcomes and high re-treatment rates. As PAE continues to mature further, studies will be able to lend more evidence to longer-term outcomes. As stated in our paper, this does not exclude PAE for select patients that may benefit from a minimally invasive procedure with short-term symptomatic improvement in LUTS.

  62. de Groat WC, Yoshimura N. Anatomy and physiology of the lower urinary tract. Handb Clin Neurol. 2015.

  63. Helgason ÁR, Adolfsson J, Dickman P, et al. Sexual desire, erection, orgasm and ejaculatory functions and their importance to elderly Swedish men: a population-based study. Age Ageing. 1996;25(4):285–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/25.4.285.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Sokolakis I, Pyrgidis N, Russo GI, Sountoulides P, Hatzichristodoulou G. Preserving ejaculation: a guide through the landscape of interventional and surgical options for benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol Focus. 2022;8(2):380–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2022.03.008. Epub 2022 Mar 24 PMID: 35339416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Napier-Hemy TP, Liu AKL, Floyd MS, et al. Acute urinary retention in a 27-year-old male secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia treated with Holmium Enucleation of the Prostate (HOLEP). Urologia Journal. 2023;90(2):426–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/03915603211016613.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Poulakis V, Ferakis N, Witzsch U, De Vries R, Becht E. Erectile dysfunction after transurethral prostatectomy for lower urinary tract symptoms: results from a center with over 500 patients. Asian J Androl. 2006;8:69–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Barazani Y, Stahl PJ, Nagler HM, et al. Management of ejaculatory disorders in infertile men. Asian J Androl. 2012;14:525–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Alloussi SH, Lang C, Eichel R, Alloussi S. Ejaculation-preserving transurethral resection of prostate and bladder neck: short- and long-term results of a new innovative resection technique. J Endourol. 2014;28(1):84–9. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2013.0093. Epub 2013 Oct 10 PMID: 23952037.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Sturch P, Woo HH, McNicholas T, Muir G. Ejaculatory dysfunction after treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms: retrograde ejaculation or retrograde thinking? BJU Int. 2015;115:186–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Kim SH, Yang HK, Lee HE, et al. HoLEP does not affect the overall sexual function of BPH patients: a prospective study. Asian J Androl. 2014;16:873–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Bozzini G, Berti L, Maltagliati M, Besana U, Calori A, Müller A, Sighinolfi MC, Micali S, Pastore AL, Ledezma R, Broggini P, Rocco B, Buizza C. Ejaculation-sparing thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ES-ThuLEP): outcomes on a large cohort. World J Urol. 2021;39(6):2029–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03442-2. Epub 2020 Sep 14 PMID: 32929626.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Leonardi R. Preliminary results on selective light vaporization with the side-firing 980 nm diode laser in benign prostatic hyperplasia: an ejaculation sparing technique. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2009;12:277–80. https://doi-org.usu01.idm.oclc.org/10.1038/pcan.2009.5.

  73. Talab SS, Santiago-Lastra YA, Bachmann A, et al. V403 the impact of ejaculation-preserving photo-selective vaporization of the prostate (EP-PVP) on lower urinary tract symptoms and ejaculatory function: results of a multicenter study. J Urol. 189:e164. https://doi-org.usu01.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.02.1792.

  74. Miyauchi T, Yusu H, Kanzaki M. V3–06 ejaculation-sparing photoselective vaporization of the prostate: evaluation of the ejaculatory function and the lower urinary tract symptoms. J Urol. 2016;195:e468. https://doi-org.usu01.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.1526.

  75. McVary KT, Rogers T, Roehrborn CG. Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: 4-year results from randomized controlled study. Urology. 2019;126:171–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Darson MF, Alexander EE, Schiffman ZJ, Lewitton M, Light RA, Sutton MA, et al. Procedural techniques and multicenter postmarket experience using minimally invasive convective radiofrequency thermal therapy with Rezūm system for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Res Rep Urol. 2017;9:159–68.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. McVary KT, Gange SN, Gittelman MC, Goldberg KA, Patel K, Shore ND, et al. Minimally invasive prostate convective water vapor energy ablation: a multicenter, randomized, controlled study for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2016;195:1529–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Medi-Tate Ltd. Multi-center prospective study to assess the safety and effectiveness of Medi-Tate i-Temporary Implantable Nitinol Device (iTind) in subjects with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) [Internet]. Bethesda U.S. Natl Library Med. 2015;23.

  79. Medi-Tate Ltd. One-arm, multi-center, international prospective study to assess the efficacy of Medi-tate Temporary Implantable Nitinol Device (iTind) in subjects with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) [Internet]. Bethesda U.S. Natl Library Med. 2018;10.

  80. Sønksen J, Barber NJ, Speakman MJ, Berges R, Wetterauer U, Greene D, et al. Prospective, randomized, multinational study of prostatic urethral lift versus transurethral resection of the prostate: 12-month results from the BPH6 study. Eur Urol. 2015;68:643–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Gratzke C, Barber N, Speakman MJ, Berges R, Wetterauer U, Greene D, et al. Prostatic urethral lift vs transurethral resection of the prostate: 2-year results of the BPH6 prospective, multicentre, randomized study. BJU Int. 2017;119:767–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Sievert KD, Schonthaler M, Berges R, Toomey P, Drager D, Herlemann A, et al. Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years. World J Urol. 2019;37:1353–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Madigan Army Medical Center, 9040A Jackson Ave, Tacoma, WA, 98431, USA

    Timothy W. Brandt & Ronald J. Caras

  2. Department of Education and Research, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, WA, USA

    Jacqueline M. Luizzi

Authors
  1. Timothy W. Brandt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jacqueline M. Luizzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ronald J. Caras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

T.B. helped to select the articles for the review and wrote the main manuscript text and prepared tables 1-2. Also expanded the literature search for additional articles to include in the review. J.L. (medical librarian) helped to completed the initial literature search. R.C was senior author and helped narrow down article selection. Proofread and gave recommendations for content adjustments. All authors reviewed the manuscript. All authors are U.S. Government employees, the views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronald J. Caras.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interest

The authors declare no competing interests. 

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brandt, T.W., Luizzi, J.M. & Caras, R.J. Evaluation of Current Surgical BPH Interventions for Young and Elderly Men. Curr Urol Rep 25, 79–91 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-024-01198-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-024-01198-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation