World Journal of Urology

, Volume 36, Issue 7, pp 1111–1116 | Cite as

Combined prostatic urethral lift and remodeling of the prostate and bladder neck: a modified transurethral approach in the treatment of symptomatic lower urinary tract obstruction

  • Martin Schoenthaler
  • Karl-Dietrich Sievert
  • Dominik Stefan Schoeb
  • Arkadiusz Miernik
  • Thomas Kunit
  • Simon Hein
  • Thomas R. W. Herrmann
  • Konrad Wilhelm
Original Article



The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of combining prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and a limited resection of the prostatic middle lobe or bladder neck incision in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).


Twenty-eight patients were treated at two tertiary centers and followed prospectively. Patient evaluations included patient characteristics, relief of LUTS symptoms, erectile and ejaculatory function, continence, operative time and adverse events. Patients were followed for a mean of 10.9 months.


Patient characteristics were as follows: age 66 years (46–85), prostate volume 39.6 cc (22–66), preoperative IPSS/AUASI 20 (6–35)/QoL 3.9 (1–6)/peak flow 10.5 mL/s (4.0–19)/post-void residual volume (PVR) 123 mL (0–500). Mean operating time was 31 min (9–55). Postoperative complications were minor except for the surgical retreatment of one patient for blood clot retention (Clavien 3b). One patient required catheterization due to urinary retention. Reduction of symptoms (IPSS − 59.6%), increase in QoL (+ 49.0%), increase in flow (+ 111.5%), and reduction of PVR (− 66.8%) were significant. Antegrade ejaculation was always maintained.


Our data suggest that a combination of PUL and transurethral surgical techniques is feasible, safe, and effective. This approach may be offered to patients with moderate size prostates including those with unfavorable anatomic conditions for PUL. This procedure is still ‘minimally invasive’ and preserves sexual function. In addition, it may add to a higher functional efficacy compared to PUL alone.

Study register number



Lower urinary tract symptoms Transurethral resection of prostate Ejaculation Prostatic urethral lift 



Bladder outlet obstruction


Benign prostatic hyperplasia


Combined prostatic urethral lift and remodeling of the prostate and bladder neck


Lower urinary tract symptoms


Prostatic urethral lift


Peak flow rate


Post void residual volume


International Prostate Symptom Score


International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire Short form


International Index of erectile function


Quality of life


Transurethral resection of the prostate



The study was supported by institutional funding (University Medical Center Freiburg), no external or industrial funding was received.

Author contributions

MS: Protocol/project development, Manuscript writing/editing, surgical procedures. DSS: Manuscript writing. AM: Artwork, supervisor and adviser. TK: Data collection and management. SH: Data management. TRWH: Manuscript writing/editing. KW: Protocol/project development, data collection and management, data analysis, manuscript writing/editing.


Institutional (University Medical Center Freiburg), no external or industrial funding. This project was realized with institutional funding (University Medical Center Freiburg), no external or industrial funding was received.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

MS was a consultant in contract with Schoelly GmbH, Denzlingen, Germany, and conducts workshops for NeoTract Inc., Pleasanton, USA. AM was a consultant in contract with Schoelly GmbH, Denzlingen. KS conducts workshops for Neotract Inc., Pleasanton, USA. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical standard

The study has been approved by the local ethics committee. All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors”.

Ethical approval

504/14, Ethic committee University Medical center Freiburg.

Informed consent

All participants gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study.


  1. 1.
    Cornu J-N, Cussenot O, Haab F, Lukacs B (2010) A widespread population study of actual medical management of lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia across Europe and beyond official clinical guidelines. Eur Urol 58:450–456. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A et al (2008) Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol 180:246–249. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McVary KT, Roehrborn CG, Avins AL et al (2011) Update on AUA guideline on the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 185:1793–1803. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R (2006) Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)—incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol 50:969–980. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arai Y, Aoki Y, Okubo K et al (2000) Impact of interventional therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia on quality of life and sexual function: a prospective study. J Urol 164:1206–1211CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rosen RC, Riley A, Wagner G et al (1997) The international index of erectile function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology 49:822–830CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Woo HH, Chin PT, McNicholas TA et al (2011) Safety and feasibility of the prostatic urethral lift: a novel, minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). BJU Int 108:82–88. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sønksen J, Barber NJ, Speakman MJ et al (2015) Prospective, randomized, multinational study of prostatic urethral lift versus transurethral resection of the prostate: 12-month results from the BPH6 study. Eur Urol. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A et al (2015) EAU guidelines on the assessment of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol 67:1099–1109. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McNicholas TA, Woo HH, Chin PT et al (2013) Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift: surgical technique and multinational experience. Eur Urol 64:292–299. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Trockman BA, Gerspach J, Dmochowski R et al (1996) Primary bladder neck obstruction: urodynamic findings and treatment results in 36 men. J Urol 156:1418–1420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lourenco T, Shaw M, Fraser C et al (2010) The clinical effectiveness of transurethral incision of the prostate: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. World J Urol 28:23–32. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosen RC, Catania JA, Althof SE et al (2007) Development and validation of four-item version of male sexual health questionnaire to assess ejaculatory dysfunction. Urology 69:805–809. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cantwell AL, Bogache WK, Richardson SF et al (2014) Multicentre prospective crossover study of the “prostatic urethral lift” for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: PUL for the treatment of LUTS. BJU Int 113:615–622. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perera M, Roberts MJ, Doi SAR, Bolton D (2015) Prostatic urethral lift improves urinary symptoms and flow while preserving sexual function for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 67:704–713. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marberger H (1974) The mechanisms of ejaculation. Basic Life Sci 4:99–110PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gallizia P (1972) The smooth sphincter of the vesical neck, a genital organ. Urol Int 27:341–354CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dorschner W, Stolzenburg JU, Neuhaus J (2001) Anatomic principles of urinary incontinence. Urol Ausg A 40:223–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hermabessiere J, Guy L, Boiteux JP (1999) Human ejaculation: physiology, surgical conservation of ejaculation. Prog En Urol J Assoc Fr Urol Société Fr Urol 9:305–309Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alloussi SH, Lang C, Eichel R, Alloussi S (2014) Ejaculation-preserving transurethral resection of prostate and bladder neck: short- and long-term results of a new innovative resection technique. J Endourol 28:84–89. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bachmann A, Tubaro A, Barber N et al (2014) 180-W XPS GreenLight laser vaporisation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: 6-month safety and efficacy results of a European Multicentre Randomised Trial—The GOLIATH Study. Eur Urol 65:931–942. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roehrborn CG (2016) Prostatic urethral lift: a unique minimally invasive surgical treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urol Clin North Am 43:357–369. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Clinic of Urology, Faculty of MedicineMedical Center-University of FreiburgFreiburgGermany
  2. 2.University of Rostock Urology ClinicRostockGermany
  3. 3.Department of UrologyParacelsus Medical University SalzburgSalzburgAustria
  4. 4.Department of UrologyHannover Medical SchoolHannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations