Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Surgical Complications in the Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment

  • Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (J Silberstein, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

There are a variety of treatment options for men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH); transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the gold standard surgical treatment. The field continues to evolve with the introduction of new energy and laser technologies, increasing adoption of enucleation techniques, in addition to the advent of minimally invasive surgical technologies (MIST) that enable office-based treatments. The choice in surgical management has become very nuanced depending on a variety of patient and anatomic factors. There continues to be high success rates for surgical treatment of BPH; however, the risk profiles vary across the various surgical treatments. We sought to evaluate contemporary series and summarize the experience of complications associated with BPH treatment and management of these complications.

Recent Findings

A comprehensive literature review was performed, and identified 79 manuscripts, published between 2005 and 2021 characterizing the diagnosis and management of complications following BPH surgery. Commonly cited issues included bleeding, ureteral orifice injury, bladder neck injury, rectal injury, TURP syndrome, bladder neck contractures, urethral stricture disease, refractory OAB symptoms, and complications unique to new modalities of treatment.

Summary

The practicing urologist has multiple surgical options to choose from in treating patients with symptomatic BPH. The surgical management of BPH is generally well tolerated with high objective success rates that allow for significant improvement in urinary quality of life. It is critical to understand the potential complications associated with these various treatment options, which will enable trainees and practicing urologists to better counsel patients and manage these potential complications.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

  1. Lim KB. Epidemiology of clinical benign prostatic hyperplasia. Asian J Urol. 2017;4(3):148–51.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Srinivasan A, Wang R. An update on minimally invasive surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia: techniques, risks, and efficacy. World J Mens Health. 2020;38(4):402–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Marien T, Kadihasanoglu M, Miller N. Complications of endoscopic procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Complications of Urologic Surgery 5th ed Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier. 2018.

  4. Palmisano F, Boeri L, Fontana M, Gallioli A, De Lorenzis E, Zanetti SP, et al. Incidence and predictors of readmission within 30 days of transurethral resection of the prostate: a single center European experience. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):6575.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Teo JS, Lee YM, Ho HSS. An update on transurethral surgery for benign prostatic obstruction. Asian J Urol. 2017;4(3):195–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Guo RQ, Yu W, Meng YS, Zhang K, Xu B, Xiao YX, et al. A nomogram predicting re-operation due to secondary hemorrhage after monopolar transurethral resection of prostate. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2018;34(3):172–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fagerström T, Nyman CR, Hahn RG. Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate causes less bleeding than the monopolar technique: a single-centre randomized trial of 202 patients. BJU Int. 2010;105(11):1560–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Heiman J, Large T, Krambeck A. Best practice in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia in the patients requiring anticoagulation. Ther Adv Urol. 2018;10(12):431–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Romero-Otero J, García-González L, García-Gómez B, Justo-Quintas J, García-Rojo E, González-Padilla DA, et al. Factors influencing intraoperative blood loss in patients undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a large multicenter analysis. Urology. 2019;132:177–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sun J, Shi A, Tong Z, Chi C. Green Light photoselective vaporization of the prostate: a safe and effective treatment for elderly high-risk benign prostate hyperplasia patients with gland over 80 ml. Lasers Med Sci. 2018;33(8):1693–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vartak KP, Raghuvanshi K. Outcome of thulium laser enucleation of prostate surgery in high-risk patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urol Ann. 2019;11(4):358–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Olapade-Olaopa EO, Solomon LZ, Carter CJ, Ahiaku EK, Chiverton SG. Haematuria and clot retention after transurethral resection of the prostate: a pilot study. Br J Urol. 1998;82(5):624–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sharifi R, Lee M, Ray P, Millner SN, Dupont PF. Safety and efficacy of intravesical aminocaproic acid for bleeding after transurethral resection of prostate. Urology. 1986;27(3):214–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Qian X, Liu H, Xu D, Xu L, Huang F, He W, et al. Functional outcomes and complications following B-TURP versus HoLEP for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a review of the literature and Meta-analysis. Aging Male. 2017;20(3):184–91.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Thangasamy IA, Chalasani V, Bachmann A, Woo HH. Photoselective vaporisation of the prostate using 80-W and 120-W laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review with meta-analysis from 2002 to 2012. Eur Urol. 2012;62(2):315–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kumar V, Vineet K, Deb A. TUR syndrome - a report. Urol Case Rep. 2019;26:100982.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Demirel I, Ozer AB, Bayar MK, Erhan OL. TURP syndrome and severe hyponatremia under general anaesthesia. BMJ Case Rep. 2012;2012:bcr-2012–006899.

  18. Park H-P. Irrigation fluids used for transurethral resection of the prostate: a double-edged sword. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2019;72(2):87–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Alexander CE, Scullion MM, Omar MI, Yuan Y, Mamoulakis C, N'Dow JM, et al. Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;12(12):CD009629-CD.

  20. Madersbacher S, Roehrborn CG, Oelke M. The role of novel minimally invasive treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int. 2020;126(3):317–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Welliver C, Helo S, McVary KT. Technique considerations and complication management in transurethral resection of the prostate and photoselective vaporization of the prostate. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6(4):695–703.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Simon LV, Sajjad H, Lopez RA, Burns B. Bladder rupture. StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing LLC.; 2021.

  23. Simhan J, Ramirez D, Hudak SJ, Morey AF. Bladder neck contracture. Transl Androl Urol. 2014;3(2):214–20.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Ahyai SA, Gilling P, Kaplan SA, Kuntz RM, Madersbacher S, Montorsi F, et al. Meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic enlargement. Eur Urol. 2010;58(3):384–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R. Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)–incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol. 2006;50(5):969–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee YH, Chiu AW, Huang JK. Comprehensive study of bladder neck contracture after transurethral resection of prostate. Urology. 2005;65(3):498–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chen Y-Z, Lin W-R, Chow Y-C, Tsai W-K, Chen M, Chiu AW. Analysis of risk factors of bladder neck contracture following transurethral surgery of prostate. BMC Urol. 2021;21(1):59.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Primiceri G, Castellan P, Marchioni M, Schips L, Cindolo L. Bladder neck contracture after endoscopic surgery for benign prostatic obstruction: incidence, treatment, and outcomes. Curr Urol Rep. 2017;18(10):79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Redshaw JD, Broghammer JA, Smith TG 3rd, Voelzke BB, Erickson BA, McClung CD, et al. Intralesional injection of mitomycin C at transurethral incision of bladder neck contracture may offer limited benefit: TURNS Study Group. J Urol. 2015;193(2):587–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Eltahawy E, Gur U, Virasoro R, Schlossberg SM, Jordan GH. Management of recurrent anastomotic stenosis following radical prostatectomy using holmium laser and steroid injection. BJU Int. 2008;102(7):796–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Vanni AJ, Zinman LN, Buckley JC. Radial urethrotomy and intralesional mitomycin C for the management of recurrent bladder neck contractures. J Urol. 2011;186(1):156–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Furr J, Gelman J. Endoscopic management of urethral stricture disease and bladder neck contractures. J Endourol. 2020;34(S1):S7–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. • Kirshenbaum EJ, Zhao LC, Myers JB, Elliott SP, Vanni AJ, Baradaran N, et al. Patency and incontinence rates after robotic bladder neck reconstruction for vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis and recalcitrant bladder neck contractures: the Trauma and Urologic Reconstructive Network of Surgeons experience. Urology. 2018;118:227–33. Multi-center study evaluating outcomes of robotic bladder neck reconstruction.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sayedahmed K, El Shazly M, Olianas R, Kaftan B, Omar M. The outcome of Y-V plasty as a final option in patients with recurrent bladder neck sclerosis following failed endoscopic treatment. Cent European J Urol. 2019;72(4):408–12.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Rosenbaum CM, Dahlem R, Maurer V, Kluth LA, Vetterlein MW, Fisch M, et al. The T-plasty as therapy for recurrent bladder neck stenosis: success rate, functional outcome, and patient satisfaction. World J Urol. 2017;35(12):1907–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Abramowitz DJ, Balzano FL, Ruel NH, Chan KG, Warner JN. Transurethral incision with transverse mucosal realignment for the management of bladder neck contracture and vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis. Urology. 2021;152:102–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Barbagli G, Kulkarni SB, Joshi PM, Nikolavsky D, Montorsi F, Sansalone S, et al. Repair of sphincter urethral strictures preserving urinary continence: surgical technique and outcomes. World J Urol. 2019;37(11):2473–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chen ML, Correa AF, Santucci RA. Urethral strictures and stenoses caused by prostate therapy. Rev Urol. 2016;18(2):90–102.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang J-W, Man L-B. Transurethral resection of the prostate stricture management. Asian J Androl. 2020;22(2):140–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Wessells H, Angermeier KW, Elliott S, Gonzalez CM, Kodama R, Peterson AC, et al. male urethral stricture: American Urological Association guideline. J Urol. 2017;197(1):182–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. De Nunzio C, Brucker B, Bschleipfer T, Cornu J-N, Drake MJ, Fusco F, et al. Beyond antimuscarinics: a review of pharmacological and interventional options for overactive bladder management in men. Eur Urol. 2021;79(4):492–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Rieken M, editor. Persistence of OAB symptoms after prostate surgery. 35th Annual EAU Congress - Virtual (EAU20V); European Association of Urology. 2020.

  43. Chughtai B, Simma-Chiang V, Kaplan SA. Evaluation and management of post-transurethral resection of the prostate lower urinary tract symptoms. Curr Urol Rep. 2014;15(9):434.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Leron E, Weintraub AY, Mastrolia SA, Schwarzman P. Overactive bladder syndrome: evaluation and management. Curr Urol. 2018;11(3):117–25.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Large T, Krambeck AE. Evidence-based outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Curr Opin Urol. 2018;28(3):301–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ibrahim A, Alharbi M, Elhilali MM, Aubé M, Carrier S. 18 years of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: a single center experience. J Urol. 2019;202(4):795–800.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Elshal AM, Mekkawy R, Laymon M, El-Assmy A, El-Nahas AR. Towards optimizing prostate tissue retrieval following holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP): Assessment of two morcellators and review of literature. Can Urol Assoc J. 2015;9(9–10):E618–25.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Abedi A, Razzaghi MR, Rahavian A, Hazrati E, Aliakbari F, Vahedisoraki V, et al. Is holmium laser enucleation of the prostate a good surgical alternative in benign prostatic hyperplasia management? A review article. J Lasers Med Sci. 2020;11(2):197–203.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Saitta G, Becerra JEA, Del Álamo JF, González LL, Elbers JR, Suardi N, et al. ‘En Bloc’ HoLEP with early apical release in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. World J Urol. 2019;37(11):2451–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Scoffone CM, Cracco CM. The en-bloc no-touch holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) technique. World J Urol. 2016;34(8):1175–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Das AK, Teplitsky S, Chandrasekar T, Perez T, Guo J, Leong JY, et al. Stress urinary incontinence post-holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: a single-surgeon experience. Int Braz J Urol. 2020;46(4):624–31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Dotzauer R, La Torre A, Thomas A, Brandt MP, Böhm K, Mager R, et al. Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy versus open simple prostatectomy: a single-center comparison. World J Urol. 2021;39(1):149–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. • Lee Z, Lee M, Keehn AY, Asghar AM, Strauss DM, Eun DD. Intermediate-term urinary function and complication outcomes after robot-assisted simple prostatectomy. Urology. 2020;141:89–94. Largest series of robotic simple prostatectomy outcomes.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Bortnick E, Brown C, Simma-Chiang V, Kaplan SA. Modern best practice in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia in the elderly. Ther Adv Urol. 2020;12:1756287220929486.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Green Z, Westwood J, Somani BK. What’s new in Rezum: a transurethral water vapour therapy for BPH. Curr Urol Rep. 2019;20(7):39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. •• Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M, Anderson P, Sutton M, Aho T, 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(5):1252–61. Randomized trial comparing Aquablation versus TURP, seminal paper on BPH treatment with Aquablation.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Suarez-Ibarrola R, Bach T, Hein S, Cocci A, Russo GI, Herrmann TRW, et al. Efficacy and safety of aquablation of the prostate for patients with symptomatic benign prostatic enlargement: a systematic review. World J Urol. 2020;38(5):1147–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Roehrborn CG, Barkin J, Gange SN, Shore ND, Giddens JL, Bolton DM, et al. Five year results of the prospective randomized controlled prostatic urethral L.I.F.T. study. Can J Urol. 2017;24(3):8802–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Amparore D, Fiori C, Valerio M, Schulman C, Giannakis I, De Cillis S, et al. 3-Year results following treatment with the second generation of the temporary implantable nitinol device in men with LUTS secondary to benign prostatic obstruction. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2020.

  60. Shim SR, Kanhai KJ, Ko YM, Kim JH. Efficacy and safety of prostatic arterial embolization: systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression. J Urol. 2017;197(2):465–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Abt D, Hechelhammer L, Müllhaupt G, Markart S, Güsewell S, Kessler TM, et al. Comparison of prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial. BMJ. 2018;361:k2338.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Bach T, Gilling P, El Hajj A, Anderson P, Barber N. First multi-center all-comers study for the aquablation procedure. J Clin Med. 2020;9(2).

  63. Fardoun T, Mathieu R, Vincendeau S, Della Negra E, Corbel L, Couapel JP, et al. Risk of rectal perforation during intention to treat laser photovaporization of prostate with transrectal ultrasound guidance: a report of 4 cases. Prog Urol. 2015;25(2):101–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Gross AJ, Lipp MJ, Baumbach R, Becker B, Vogt K, Rosenbaum C, et al. Rectal perforation after aquablation of the prostate: lessons learned the hard way. World J Urol. 2021.

  65. Garg G, Deliso M, Li S, Sharma P, Abdelbaki A, Gupta N. Prostatosymphyseal fistula after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), a rare and difficult to recognize complication. Urol Case Rep. 2018;21:70–2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Kapogiannis F, Fasoulakis K, Tsiampa E, Triantafyllou S, Fasoulakis C. Prostatosymphyseal fistula after photoselective vaporization of the prostate: a very rare complication of a transurethral surgery. Cureus. 2020;12(4):e7703.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Andrews JR, Hebert KJ, Boswell TC, Avant RA, Boonipatt T, Kreutz-Rodrigues L, et al. Pubectomy and urinary reconstruction provides definitive treatment of urosymphyseal fistula following prostate cancer treatment. BJU Int. 2021;128(4):460–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Eredics K, Wachabauer D, Röthlin F, Madersbacher S, Schauer I. Reoperation rates and mortality after transurethral and open prostatectomy in a long-term nationwide analysis: have we improved over a decade? Urology. 2018;118:152–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Liao J, Zhang X, Chen M, Li D, Tan X, Gu J, et al. Transurethral resection of the prostate with preservation of the bladder neck decreases postoperative retrograde ejaculation. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2019;14(1):96–101.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Hu B, Song Z, Liu H, Qiao L, Zhao Y, Wang M, et al. A comparison of incidences of bladder neck contracture of 80- versus 180-W GreenLight laser photoselective vaporization of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31(8):1573–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Malik RD, Wang CE, Lapin B, Gerber GS, Helfand BT. Comparison of patients undergoing laser vaporization of the prostate versus TURP using the ACS-NSQIP database. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2015;18(1):18–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Jones P, Rai BP, Aboumarzouk O, Somani BK. UroLift: a new minimally-invasive treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Ther Adv Urol. 2016;8(6):372–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. •• 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. Seminal paper on outcomes after Rezum for BPH.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Elterman D, Bach T, Rijo E, Misrai V, Anderson P, Zorn KC, et al. Transfusion rates after 800 Aquablation procedures using various haemostasis methods. BJU Int. 2020;125(4):568–72.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Gilling PJ, Barber N, Bidair M, Anderson P, Sutton M, Aho T, et al. Randomized controlled trial of aquablation versus transurethral resection of the prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia: one-year outcomes. Urology. 2019;125:169–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Leong JY, Patel AS, Ramasamy R. Minimizing sexual dysfunction in BPH surgery. Curr Sex Health Rep. 2019;11(3):190–200.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Bebi C, Turetti M, Lievore E, Ripa F, Bilato M, Rocchini L, et al. Sexual and ejaculatory function after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate and bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate: a single-center experience. Int J Impot Res. 2020.

  78. Bedir F, Keske M, Demirdogen SO, Kocaturk H, Atmaca AF, Canda AE. Diagnosis and conservative management of ureteral orifice injury during robotic prostatectomy for a large prostate with a prominent median lobe. J Endourol Case Rep. 2019;5(2):39–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Bhanvadia R, Ashbrook C, Gahan J, Mauck R, Bagrodia A, Margulis V, et al. Perioperative outcomes and cost of robotic vs open simple prostatectomy in the modern robotic era: results from the National Inpatient Sample. BJU Int. 2020.

  80. Breyer BN, Davis CB, Cowan JE, Kane CJ, Carroll PR. Incidence of bladder neck contracture after robot-assisted laparoscopic and open radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2010;106(11):1734–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Lucca I, Shariat SF, Hofbauer SL, Klatte T. Outcomes of minimally invasive simple prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol. 2015;33(4):563–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Simone G, Misuraca L, Anceschi U, Minisola F, Ferriero M, Guaglianone S, et al. Urethra and ejaculation preserving robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: near-infrared fluorescence imaging-guided Madigan technique. Eur Urol. 2019;75(3):492–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Ahmed Gadam I, Nuhu A, Aliyu S. Ten-year experience with open prostatectomy in Maiduguri. ISRN Urology. 2012;2012:406872.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Oranusi C, Nwofor A, Oranusi I. Complication rates of open transvesical prostatectomy according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Niger J Clin Pract. 2012;15(1):34–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cooper R. Benson.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare they have no conflict of interest with regards to this manuscript and no relevant financial disclosures.

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.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ottaiano, N., Shelton, T., Sanekommu, G. et al. Surgical Complications in the Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment. Curr Urol Rep 23, 83–92 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-022-01091-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-022-01091-z

Keywords

Navigation