Advertisement

Electrophysiological differences between typical and dense benign prostatic hyperplasia tissues retrieved after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate

  • Hyeon Woo Kim
  • Joho Yun
  • Young Keum Kim
  • Dong Gil Shin
  • Jong-Hyun LeeEmail author
  • Jeong Zoo LeeEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction

Electrophysiological differences between typical and dense (beach ball) benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) tissues were investigated using a needle device with a micro-electrical impedance spectroscopy (µEIS) sensor.

Materials and methods

Ten pieces of typical BPH tissues and beach balls were collected from ten patients during the morcellation procedure of Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Their impedance was measured at a frequency range from 100 to 1 MHz using the µEIS-on-a-needle (µEoN). The impedance data (magnitude) were compared between the two tissue types and their correlation with the pathologic features was investigated.

Results

The mean magnitude of the beach balls tended to be larger than that of the typical BPH tissues at all investigated frequencies. Notably, significantly larger magnitudes were observed in the beach balls at the frequencies higher than 15.9 kHz (p ≤ 0.02). The variation of mean log-transformed magnitudes by frequency was significantly different between both tissue types (p < 0.001). The pathologic features of the beach balls presented pure stromal nodules of nodular hyperplasia, while the typical BPH tissues presented mixed epithelial-stromal nodules.

Conclusions

The impedance difference between typical BPH tissues and beach balls is assumed to be attributed to the amount of their stromal content.

Keywords

Electrical impedance Benign prostatic hyperplasia Micro-electrical-mechanical systems Histology 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the “Biomedical Integrated Technology Research” Project through a grant provided by GIST in 2017.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Hochreiter, W.W., Thalmann, G.N., Burkhard, F.C., Studer, U.E.: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate combined with electrocautery resection: the mushroom technique. J. Urol. 168, 1470–1474 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahyai, S.A., Lehrich, K., Kuntz, R.M.: Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate: 3-year follow-up results of a randomized clinical trial. Eur. Urol. 52, 1456–1463 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fraundorfer, M.R., Gilling, P.J.: Holmium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate combined with mechanical morcellation: preliminary results. Eur. Urol. 33, 69–72 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gilling, P.J., Kennett, K., Das, A.K., Thompson, D., Fraundorfer, M.R.: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) combined with transurethral tissue morcellation: an update on the early clinical experience. J. Endourol. 12, 457–459 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Seki, N., Mochida, O., Kinukawa, N., Sagiyama, K., Naito, S.: Holmium laser enucleation for prostatic adenoma: analysis of learning curve over the course of 70 consecutive cases. J. Urol. 170, 1847–1850 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bae, J., Oh, S.J., Paick, J.S.: The learning curve for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: a single-center experience. Korean J. Urol. 51, 688–693 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shah, H.N., Mahajan, A.P., Sodha, H.S., Hegde, S., Mohile, P.D., Bansal, M.B.: Prospective evaluation of the learning curve for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. J. Urol. 177, 1468–1474 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Monn, M.F., El Tayeb, M., Bhojani, N., Mellon, M.J., Sloan, J.C., Boris, R.S., Lingeman, J.E.: Predictors of enucleation and morcellation time during holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Urology 86, 338–342 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Piao, S., Choo, M.S., Wang, Y., Lee, Y.J., Bae, J., Oh, S.J.: Clinical and pathological characteristics of hard nodules resistant to morcellation during holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Int. Neurourol. J. 19, 90–98 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vavassori, I., Valenti, S., Naspro, R., Vismara, A., Dell’Acqua, V., Manzetti, A., Hurle, R.: Three-year outcome following holmium laser enucleation of the prostate combined with mechanical morcellation in 330 consecutive patients. Eur. Urol. 53, 599–604 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ritter, M., Krombach, P., Bolenz, C., Martinschek, A., Bach, T., Haecker, A.: Standardized comparison of prostate morcellators using a new ex-vivo model. J. Endourol. 26, 697–700 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    El-Hakim, A., Elhilali, M.M.: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate can be taught: the first learning experience. BJU Int. 90, 863–869 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giaever, I., Keese, C.R.: A morphological biosensor for mammalian-cells. Nature 366, 591–592 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muller, J., Thirion, C., Pfaffl, M.W.: Electric cell-substrate impedance sensing (ECIS) based real-time measurement of titer dependent cytotoxicity induced by adenoviral vectors in an IPI-2I cell culture model. Biosens. Bioelectron. 26, 2000–2005 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abdolahad, M., Janmaleki, M., Taghinejad, M., Taghnejad, H., Salehi, F., Mohajerzadeh, S.: Single-cell resolution diagnosis of cancer cells by carbon nanotube electrical spectroscopy. Nanoscale 5, 3421–3427 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee, H., Lee, Y., Song, C., Cho, H.R., Ghaffari, R., Choi, T.K., Kim, K.H., Lee, Y.B., Ling, D., Lee, H., Yu, S.J., Choi, S.H., Hyeon, T., Kim, D.H.: An endoscope with integrated transparent bioelectronics and theranostic nanoparticles for colon cancer treatment. Nat. Commun. (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10059 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haemmerich, D., Schutt, D.J., Wright, A.W., Webster, J.G., Mahvi, D.M.: Electrical conductivity measurement of excised human metastatic liver tumours before and after thermal ablation. Physiol. Meas. 30, 459–466 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laufer, S., Ivorra, A., Reuter, V.E., Rubinsky, B., Solomon, S.B.: Electrical impedance characterization of normal and cancerous human hepatic tissue. Physiol. Meas. 31, 995–1009 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yun, J., Kim, H.W., Kim, H.-I., Lee, J.-H.: Electrical impedance spectroscopy on a needle for safer Veress needle insertion during laparoscopic surgery. Sens. Actuator B 250, 453–460 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ye, W.W., Shi, J.Y., Chan, C.Y., Zhang, Y., Yang, M.: A nanoporous membrane based impedance sensing platform for DNA sensing with gold nanoparticle amplification. Sens. Actuator B 193, 877–882 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Manickam, A., Johnson, C.A., Kavusi, S., Hassibi, A.: Interface design for CMOS-integrated electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) biosensors. Sensors 12, 14467–14488 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tian, F., Lyu, J., Shi, J.Y., Tan, F., Yang, M.: A polymeric microfluidic device integrated with nanoporous alumina membranes for simultaneous detection of multiple foodborne pathogens. Sens. Actuator B 225, 312–318 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nguyen, B.T.T., Koh, G., Lim, H.S., Chua, A.J.S., Ng, M.M.L., Toh, C.S.: Membrane-based electrochemical nanobiosensor for the detection of virus. Anal. Chem. 81, 7226–7234 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yun, J., Kim, H.W., Lee, J.H.: Improvement of depth profiling into biotissues using micro electrical impedance spectroscopy on a needle with selective passivation. Sensors (2016).  https://doi.org/10.3390/s16122207 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yun, J., Kang, G., Park, Y., Kim, H.W., Cha, J.J., Lee, J.H.: Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy with interdigitated electrodes at the end of hypodermic needle for depth profiling of biotissues. Sens. Actuator B 237, 984–991 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yun, J., Kim, H.W., Park, Y., Cha, J.J., Lee, J.Z., Shin, D.G., Lee, J.H.: Micro electrical impedance spectroscopy on a needle for ex vivo discrimination between human normal and cancer renal tissues. Biomicrofluidics (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4951702 Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Beck, S.D.W., Patel, M.I., Snyder, M.E., Kattan, M.W., Motzer, R.J., Reuter, V.E., Russo, P.: Effect of papillary and chromophobe cell type on disease-free survival after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 11, 71–77 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyPusan National University HospitalBusanSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Biomedical Science and EngineeringGwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST)GwangjuSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of PathologyPusan National University HospitalBusanSouth Korea
  4. 4.Department of Biomedical Science and Engineering, MEMS and Nano Systems Lab. #317Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST)GwangjuSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations