Current Sexual Health Reports

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 76–82 | Cite as

Sexual complications of minimally invasive surgical therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia

  • Brett D. Lebed
  • William I. Jaffe
  • Alexis E. Te
Article
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common disease process involved in aging, which can have a substantial impact on quality of life. Recently, there has been an increased focus on the correlation of lower urinary tract symptoms from BPH with sexual dysfunction. Multiple studies have implicated these symptoms as a risk factor for erectile dysfunction, ejaculatory dysfunction, and decreased libido. Invasive surgical prostate therapies also have been associated with erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction. Minimally invasive surgical therapies have been developed not only to alleviate symptoms that affect quality of life but also to reduce complications associated with standard surgical therapy, including adverse effects on sexual function. With the increased emphasis placed on sexual function and the greater level of concern expressed by patients, it is necessary to evaluate treatment modalities for their effect on erectile and ejaculatory function. This review focuses on the sexual outcomes of minimally invasive prostate therapies, especially with regards to erectile dysfunction and ejaculatory dysfunction, and the impact of these therapies on quality of life.

Keywords

Erectile Dysfunction Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Sexual Function Sexual Dysfunction Lower Urinary Tract Symptom 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Berry SJ, Coffey DS, Walsh PC: The development of human prostatic hyperplasia with age. J Urol 1984, 132:474–479.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arrighi HM, Metter EJ, Guess HA, Fozzard JL: Natural history of benign prostatic hyperplasia and risk of prostatectomy. Urology 1991, 38:4–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kirby RS: The natural history of benign prostatic hyperplasia: what have we learned in the last decade? Urology 2000, 56(Suppl 5A):S3-S6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schulman CC: Lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia: minimizing morbidity caused by treatment. Urology 2003, 62(3suppl1):24–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mebust WK, Holtgrewe HL, Cockett ATK, et al.: Transurethral prostatectomy: immediate and post operative complications. A cooperative study of 13 participating institutions evaluating 3885 patients. J Urol 1989, 141:243–247.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoznek A, Abbou C: Impact of interventional therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia on quality of life and sexual function. Curr Urol Rep 2001, 2:311–317.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rosen R, Altwein J, Boyle P, et al.: Lower urinary tract symptoms and male sexual dysfunction: the multinational sur vey of the aging male (MSAM-7). Eur Urol 2003, 44:637–649. A large-scale, community-based study that showed lower urinary tract symptoms to be an independent risk factor for sexual dysfunction in older men.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Van Dijk M, Skrekas T, de la Rosette J: The association between lower urinary tract symptoms and sexual dysfunction: fact or fiction? Curr Opin Urol 2005, 15:39–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Braun MH, Sommer F, Haupt G, et al.: Lower urinary tract symptoms and erectile dysfunction: co-morbidity or typical "aging male" symptoms? Results of the Cologne male survey. Eur Urol 2003, 44:588–594.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boyle P, Robertson C, Mazzetta C, et al.; the UrEpik Study Group: The association between lower urinary tract symptoms and erectile dysfunction in four centres: the UrEpik study. BJU Int 2003, 92:719–725.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Calais Da Silva F, Marquis P, Deschaseaux, P, et al.: Relative importance of sexuality and quality of life in patients with prostatic symptoms. Results of an international study. Eur Urol 1997, 31:272–280.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cappelleri JC, Siegel RL, Osterloh IH, Rosen RC: Relationship between patient self-assessment of erectile function and the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function. Urology 2000, 56:477–481.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    O’Leary MP, Fowler FJ, Lenderking WR, et al.: A brief male sexual function inventory for urology. Urology 1995, 46:697–706.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    So EP, Ho PC, Bodenstab W, et al.: Erectile impotence associated with transurethral prostatectomy. Urology 1982, 19:259–262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Soderdahl DW, Knight RW, Hansberry KL: Erectile dysfunction following transurethral resection of the prostate. J Urol 1996, 156:1354–1356.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zohar J, Meiraz D, Maoz B, et al.: Factors influencing sexual activity after prostatectomy: a prospective study. J Urol 1976, 116:332–334.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Francisca EAE, D’Ancona FCH, Meuleman EJH: Sexual function following high energy microwave thermotherapy: results of a randomized controlled study comparing transurethral microwave thermotherapy to transurethral prostatic resection. J Urol 1999, 161:486–490.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bieri S, Iselin CE, Rohner S: Capsular perforation localization and adenoma size as prognostic indicators of erectile dysfunction after transurethral prostatectomy. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1997, 31:545–548.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lefaucheur JP, Yiou R, Salomon L, et al.: Assessment of penile small nerve fiber damage after transurethral resection of the prostate by measurement of penile thermal sensation. J Urol 2000, 164:1416–1419. Objective method of evaluation for the neurophysiologic evaluation of surgically induced erectile dysfunction.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fitzpatrick JM, Mebust WK: Minimally invasive and endoscopic management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. In Campbell’s Urology, edn 8. Edited by Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED, Wein AJ. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2002:1379–1422.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McConnell JD, Barry MJ, Bruskewitz RC, et al.: Benign prostatic hyperplasia: diagnosis and treatment. Clinical practice guidelines, No. 8, AHCPR Publication No. 94-0582. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services; 1994.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Emberton M, Neal DE, Black N, et al.: The effect of prostatectomy on symptom severity and quality of life. Br J Urol 1996, 77:233–247.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Arai Y, Aoki Y, Okubo K, et al.: Impact of interventional therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia on quality of life and sexual function: a prospective study. J Urol 2000, 164:1206–1211. A prospective trial evaluating the impact of various treatment modalities (TURP, TUNA, TUMT, and interstitial laser coagulation of the prostate) on quality of life and sexual function.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wasson JH, Reda DJ, Bruskewitz RC, et al.: A comparison of transurethral surgery with watchful waiting for moderate symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia. The Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Transurethral Resection of the Prostate. N Engl J Med 1995, 332:75–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Leliefeld HH, Stoevelaar HJ, McDonnell J: Sexual function before and after various treatments for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int 2002, 89:208–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Brookes ST, Donovan JL, Peters TJ, et al.: Sexual dysfunction in men after treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms: evidence from a randomized controlled trial. BMJ 2002, 324:1059–1065. Evidence from a multicenter, randomized controlled trial showing an improvement in erectile function following treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms using TURP or laser therapy.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hammadeh MY, Philp T: Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TUVP) is effective, safe and durable [review]. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2003, 6:121–126. Review of six randomized, prospective studies of the efficacy and sexual complications of transurethral vaporization of the prostate, compared with TURP.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shokeir AA, al-Sisi H, Farage YM, et al.: Transurethral prostatectomy: a prospective randomized study of conventional resection and electrovaporization in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Br J Urol 1997, 80:570–574.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kaplan SA, Laor E, Fatal M, Te AE: Transurethral resection of the prostate versus transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate: a blinded, prospective comparative study with 1-year followup. J Urol 1998, 159:454–458.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kaplan SA, Te AE: Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate (TVP): a novel method for treating men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 1995, 45:566–573.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kupeli S, Soygur T, Yilmaz E, Budak M: Combined transurethral resection and vaporization of the prostate using a newly designed electrode: a promising treatment alternative for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Endourol 1999, 13:225–228.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Van Swol CF, Van Vliet RJ, Verdaasdonk RM, et al.: Electrovaporization as a treatment modality for transurethral resection of the prostate: influence of generator type. Urology 1999, 53:317–321.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Patel A, Fuches GJ, Gutierrez-Aceves J, et al.: Prostate heating patterns comparing electrosurgical transurethral resection and vaporization: a prospective randomized study. J Urol 1997, 157:169–172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hammadeh MY, Fowlis GA, Singh M, et al.: Transurethral electrovaporization of the prostate, a possible alternative to transurethral resection: a one-year follow up of a prospective randomized trial. Br J Urol 1998, 81:721–725.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Issa MM: Laser therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. AUA Update Series 2004, 22:90–95.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tooher R, Sutherland P, Costello A, et al.: A systematic review of holmium laser prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia [review]. J Urol 2004, 171:1773–1781.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tan AHH, Gilling PJ, Kennett KM, et al.: Long-term results of high-power holmium laser vaporization (ablation) of the prostate. BJU Int 2003, 92:707–709.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gilling P, Cass C, Malcolm A, et al.: Holmium laser resection of the prostate versus neodymium:yttriumaluminum-garnet visual laser ablation of the prostate: a randomized prospective comparison of the two techniques for laser prostatectomy. Urology 1998, 51:573–577.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gilling P, Mackey M, Cresswell M, et al.: Holmium laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective trial with 1-year followup. J Urol 1999, 162:1640–1644.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Westenberg A, Gilling P, Kennett K, et al.: Holmium laser resection of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate: results of a randomized trial with 4-year minimum long-term followup. J Urol 2004, 172:616–619. Long-term results of a randomized prospective trial comparing holmium laser resection of the prostate to TURP, including erectile dysfunction.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kuntz R, Ahyai S, Lehrich K, Fayad A: Transurethral holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral electrocautery resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective trial in 200 patients. J Urol 2004, 172:1012–1016.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Aho TF, Gilling P, Kennett KM, et al.: Holmium laser bladder neck incision versus holmium enucleation of the prostate as outpatient procedures for prostates less than 40 grams: a randomized trial. J Urol 2005, 174:210–214.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Malek RS, Nahen K: Photoselective vaporization of the prostate: KTP laser therapy of obstructive benign prostatic hyperplasia. AUA Update Series 2004, 23:154–159.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Malek RS, Kuntzman RS, Barrett DM: High power potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser vaporization prostatectomy. J Urol 2000, 163:1730–1733.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Te AE, Malloy TR, Stein BS, et al.: Photoselective vaporization of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: 12-month results from the first United States multicenter prospective trial. J Urol 2004, 172:1404–1408. A prospective multicenter trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of KTP laser prostatectomy, including sexual complications, in 139 men.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Schulman CC, Zlotta AR, Rasor JS, et al.: Transurethral needle ablation: safety, feasibility and tolerance of a new office based procedure for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol 1993, 24:415–423.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Larson BT, Bostwick DG, Corica AG, Larson TR: Histological changes of minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer: clinical implications. J Urol 2003, 170:2–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rosario DJ, Woo H, Potts KL, et al.: Safety and efficacy of transurethral needle ablation of the prostate for symptomatic outlet obstruction. Br J Urol 1997, 80:579–586.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hill B, Belville W, Bruskewitz R, et al.: Transurethral needle ablation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: 5-year results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial. J Urol 2004, 171:2336–2340. Long-term outcome of a prospective, randomized, multicenter comparison of transurethral needle ablation versus TURP, including reports on rates of retrograde ejaculation and erectile dysfunction.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Roehrborn CG, Issa MM, Bruskewitz RC et al.: Transurethral needle ablation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: 12-month results of a prospective, multicenter U.S. study. Urology 1998, 51:415–421.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Walmsley K, Kaplan SA: Transurethral microwave thermotherapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: separating truth from marketing hype. J Urol 2004, 172:1249–1255.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Larson TR, Bostwick DG, Corica A: Temperature-correlated histopathologic changes following microwave thermoablation of obstructive tissue in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 1996, 47:463–469.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Blute ML, Larson T: Minimally invasive therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 2001, 58(Suppl 6):S33-S40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tsai YS, Lin JS, Tong YC, et al.: Transurethral microwave thermotherapy for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: long-term durability with Prostcare. Eur Urol 2001, 39:688–692.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Norby B, Nielsen HV, Frimodt-Moller PC: Transurethral interstitial laser coagulation of the prostate and transurethral microwave thermotherapy vs transurethral resection or incision of the prostate: results of a randomized, controlled study in patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int 2002, 90:853–862.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Hoffman R, MacDonald R, Monga M, et al.: Transurethral microwave thermotherapy vs transurethral resection for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review. BJU Int 2004, 94:1031–1036.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Riehmann M, Knes JM, Heisey D, et al.: Transurethral resection versus incision of the prostate: a randomized prospective study. Urology 1995, 45:768–775.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Yang Q, Peters TJ, Donovan JL, et al.: Transurethral incision compared with transurethral resection of the prostate for bladder outlet obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Urol 2001, 165:1526–1532.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kochakarn W, Lertsithichai P: Unilateral transurethral incision for primary bladder neck obstruction: symptom relief and fertility preservation. World J Urol 2003, 21:159–162.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Braun M, Wassmer G, Klotz T, et al.: Epidemiology of erectile dysfunction: results of the Cologne Male Survey. Int J Impot Res 2000, 12:305–311.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Nicolosi A, Glasser DB, Moreira ED, et al.; Erectile Dysfunction Epidemiology Cross National Study Group: Prevalence of erectile dysfunction and associated factors among men without concomitant diseases: a population study. Int J Impot Res 2003, 15:253–257.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brett D. Lebed
    • 1
  • William I. Jaffe
  • Alexis E. Te
  1. 1.Department of UrologyTemple University School of MedicinePhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations