Laser treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia

To evaluate the role of lasers that allow acute removal of obstructing tissue in the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). A MEDLINE search over the last 6 years focused on randomized trials, large case series and review articles. A total of more than 4,000 patients were analyzed with respect to the morbidity and outcome, and the advantages and disadvantages of the various lasers. Laser treatment of BPH has evolved from coagulation to enucleation. Blood loss is significantly reduced as compared to transurethral resection and open prostatectomy. Ablative/vaporizing techniques have recently become popular again with the marketing of new high-powered 80 W potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) and 100 W holmium lasers. Vaporization immediately removes obstructing tissue, but tissue specimen cannot be obtained. KTP short-term results are promising, but long-term results and randomized trials are lacking. Postoperative volume reduction is less than with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), and the KTP laser can be used for BPH treatment only. HoLEP allows whole lobes of the prostate to be removed. Prostates of all sizes can be operated on. It is at least as safe and effective as TURP and open prostatectomy, with significantly lower morbidity, as shown by several well-designed randomized clinical trials. It provides specimen for histological evaluation. In addition, the holmium laser can be used for the endourological treatment of stones, strictures and tumors. HoLEP appears to be a size-independent new “gold standard” in the surgical treatment of BPH.     

Laser treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: basics and physical differences

Context

Laser treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) has become more prevalent in recent years. Although multiple surgical approaches exist, there is confusion about laser-tissue interaction, especially in terms of physical aspects and with respect to the optimal treatment modality.

Objective

To compare available laser systems with respect to physical fundamentals and to discuss the similarities and differences among introduced laser devices.

Evidence acquisition

The paper is based on the second expert meeting on the laser treatment of BPO organised by the European Association of Urology Section of Uro-Technology. A systematic literature search was also carried out to cover the topic of laser treatment of BPO extensively.

Evidence synthesis

The principles of generation of laser radiation, laser fibre construction, the types of energy emission, and laser-tissue interaction are discussed in detail for the laser systems used in the treatment of BPO. The most relevant laser systems are compared and their physical properties discussed in depth.

Conclusions

Laser treatment of BPO is gaining widespread acceptance. Detailed knowledge of the physical principles allows the surgeon to discriminate between available laser systems and their possible pitfalls to guarantee high safety levels for the patient.     

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates >70 g: 24-month follow-up

OBJECTIVE: Prospectively evaluate perioperative outcomes and 2-yr follow-up after holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) and standard open prostatectomy (OP) for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia-related obstructed voiding symptoms, with prostates >70 g. METHODS: From March 2003 to December 2004, 80 consecutive patients were randomised for surgical treatment with HoLEP (n=41) or standard OP (n=39). All patients were preoperatively assessed with International Prostate Symptom Score and International Index of Erectile Function questionnaires and complete urodynamic evaluation. Intraoperative and perioperative parameters such as blood loss, catheter removal, and hospital stays were assessed. Early and late complications were recorded. Patients were evaluated at 1-, 3-, 12-, and 24-mo follow-ups with the same tests. RESULTS: Operating room time was significantly shorter for the OP group (72.09+/-21.22 min vs. 58.31+/-11.95 min, p<0.0001); catheter removal (1.5+/-1.07 d and 4.1+/-0.5 d, p<0.001) and hospital stay (2.7+/-1.1 d vs. 5.4+/-1.05 d, p<0.001) were shorter in the HoLEP group. Blood loss was less and blood transfusions fewer in the HoLEP group (p<0.001). In both groups urodynamic and uroflowmetry findings improved from baseline, were still evident at the 24-mo follow-up, and were comparable between the two groups. Late complications were also comparable. CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP is a feasible technique for treating large prostates. Functional results are similar to OP at the 2-yr follow-up. Reduced catheterisation, hospital stay, and blood loss make HoLEP an attractive option for the treatment of large prostates.     

Transurethral photoselective vaporization versus transvesical open enucleation for prostatic adenomas >80ml: 12-mo results of a randomized prospective study

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and the safety of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) to open prostatectomy (OP) for the surgical treatment of large prostatic adenomas. METHODS: A total of 125 patients with prostate glands >80ml were randomly allocated to PVP (n=65) or OP (n=60) and prospectively evaluated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 mo postoperatively. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and peak urinary flow rate (Q(max)) were chosen as primary treatment-related end points. RESULTS: The patients who underwent PVP experienced a longer length of operation time, shorter time of catheterization, and shorter hospital stay. Adverse events were minor and of similar profiles in both groups, although patients who underwent OP showed a higher transfusion rate. All functional parameters improved significantly compared to baseline values in both groups. The IPSS did not differ between the two groups at 3, 6, and 12 mo postoperatively. Patients who underwent OP scored better in the IPSS quality of life score at 6 and 12 mo postoperatively. No significant differences between the two groups in the Q(max), postvoid residual urine volume, and International Index for Erectile Function-5 questionnaire were detected. At 3 mo prostate volume was significantly lower in the OP group compared to the PVP group (median value 10ml vs. 50ml; p<0.001) and remained as such throughout follow-up, whereas prostate-specific antigen values reached statistical difference at 6 mo (median value 2ng/ml vs. 2.4ng/ml; p=0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that for a 12-mo period PVP is a highly acceptable treatment alternative to OP.     

Critical review of lasers in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)

? Laser treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia has challenged transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to advances in laser technology, better understanding of tissue-laser interactions and growing clinical experience. ? Various lasers have been introduced including neodymium: yttrium aluminium garnet (YAG), holmium (Ho):YAG, potassium titanyl phosphate:YAG, thulium(Tm) and diode laser. Based on the different wave-length dependent laser-prostatic tissue interactions, the main techniques are coagulation, vaporization, resection and enucleation. ? The present review aims to help urologists to distinguish and to critically evaluate the role of different laser methods in the treatment by using an evidence-based approach. It also details further evidence for use in specific patient groups (in retention, on anticoagulation) and addresses the issues of cost and learning curve. ? Coagulation-based techniques have been abandoned; holmium ablation/resection of the prostate has been superseded by the enucleation technique Ho-laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). The short-term efficacy of the emerging laser treatments such as diode and Tm prostatectomy has been suggested by low quality studies. HoLEP and photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) represent valid clinical alternatives to TURP. HoLEP is the most rigorously analysed laser technique with durable efficacy for any prostate size and low early and late morbidity. PVP has grown in acceptance and popularity but long-term results from high quality studies are pending.     

经尿道前列腺选择性绿激光手术与经尿道前列腺电切术的疗效比较

目的评价经尿道前列腺选择性绿激光手术（greenlight photoselective vaporization of prostate,PVP）与经尿道前列腺电切术（transurethral prostatectomy,TURP）的临床疗效。方法将178例良性前列腺增生（benign prostatic hyperplasia,BPH）患者随机分为两组,95例行PVP术（PVP组）,83例行TURP术（TURP组）,比较两种术式的平均手术时间、术中出血量、输血量、近期疗效及并发症等情况。结果 PVP组和TURP组平均手术时间分别为（47.4±5.1）min和（61.7±6.2）min,前者显著低于后者,PVP组术中出血量、输血量、术后膀胱冲洗时间、留置尿管时间及住院时间均显著少于TURP组,PVP组近期并发症发生率明显小于TURP组,两组术后前列腺国际症状评分（IPSS）、生活质量评分（QOL）、最大尿流率、剩余尿量较术前均有显著改善。结论 PVP是一种安全有效的治疗BPH的理想微创术式,具有手术时间短、创伤小、出血少、恢复快、并发症发生率低等特点。     

Transurethral Visual Laser Ablation of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Using a KTP/YAG Laser

Background :
Transurethral visual laser ablation of the prostate (VLAP) has been established as an alternative method for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, most VLAP procedures utilize only a neodymium:yttrium-aluminum-gamet (Nd:YAC) laser. Since a potassiumtitenyl-phosphate (KTP) laser offers limited tissue penetration, KTP can be safely utilized to excise part of the obstructing prostatic tissue. This study assessed the interaction between KTP vaporization and YAG coagulative ablation to determine the safety and efficacy of VLAP utilizing a combined KTP/YAG treatment.
Methods :
Forty patients with bladder outlet obstruction secondary to BPH were treated with VLAP using a KTP/YAG laser. The laser light was delivered by an angle delivery device.
Results :
Most cases demonstrated a significant improvement in routine subjective and objective parameters (AUA symptom score, peak flow rate, average flow rate, and amount of residual urine). No significant complications relating to this procedure were reported, however, 4 patients experienced postoperative acute urinary retention.
Conclusion :
KTP/YAG laser ablation of the prostate is safe and effective for the treatment of BPH.     

A Review of the Recent Evidence (2006–2008) for 532-nm Photoselective Laser Vaporisation and Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate

Context

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and 532-nm laser vaporisation of the prostate (with potassium titanyl phosphate [KTP] or lithium borate [LBO]) are promising alternatives to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and open prostatectomy (OP).

Objective

To assess safety, efficacy, and durability by analysing the most recent evidence of both techniques, aiming to identify advantages, pitfalls, and unresolved issues.

Evidence acquisition

A Medline search of recently published data (2006–2008) regarding both techniques over the last 2 yr (January 2006 to September 2008) was performed using evidence obtained from randomised trials (level of evidence: 1b), well-designed controlled studies without randomisation (level of evidence: 2a), individual cohort studies (level of evidence: 2b), individual case control studies (level of evidence: 3), and case series (level of evidence: 4).

Evidence synthesis

In the last 2 yr, several case-control and cohort studies have demonstrated reproducibility, safety, and efficacy of HoLEP and 80-W KTP laser vaporisation. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were available for HoLEP, two compared with TURP and two compared with OP, with follow-up >24 mo. Results confirmed general efficacy and durability of HoLEP, as compared with both standard techniques. Only two RCTs were available comparing KTP laser vaporisation with TURP with short-term follow-up, and only one RCT was available comparing KTP laser vaporisation with OP. The results confirmed the overall low perioperative morbidity of KTP laser vaporisation, although efficacy was comparable to TURP in the short term, despite a higher reoperation rate.

Conclusions

Although they are at different points of maturation, KTP or LBO laser vaporisation and HoLEP are promising alternatives to both TURP and OP. Sufficient data proves HoLEP's durability for most prostate sizes at long-term follow-up; KTP laser vaporisation needs further evaluation to define the reoperation rate. Increasing the number of quality prospective RCTs with adequate follow-up is mandatory to tailor each technique to the right patient.     

BPH与勃起功能障碍关系的研究进展

目前研究已证实勃起功能障碍(ED)和良性前列腺增生(BPH)之间除了有高龄等共同危险因素外,在流行病学上也具有相关关系。虽然目前的研究尚不能得出直接的因果关系,但包括一氧化氮生物利用度改变,自主神经系统和α1受体功能亢进,RhoA/Rhod激酶通路异常及代谢综合征等多种因素在ED和BPH的发病中均起到重要作用。因此对BPH患者进行评估治疗时,应同时筛查性功能指标,判断是否同时合并有ED。多项临床研究发现他达拉非等PDE5抑制剂在ED合并BPH相关下尿路症状的治疗中效果良好,这为进一步研究ED合并BPH的治疗和预防奠定了基础。     

腹腔镜下耻骨后腹膜外保留尿道的前列腺切除术

目的探讨腹腔镜下经耻骨后腹膜外保留尿道的前列腺切除术治疗大腺体前列腺增生症的可行性。方法自2006年1月至2007年1月对9例前列腺增生症的病人采用腹腔镜行耻骨后腹膜外前列腺切除术,病人年龄为(77.8±6.8)岁,范围为(62～83)岁。经直肠前列腺B超显示前列腺大小为(101.3±36.2)g,范围为(62～172)g,均无明显中叶增生。腹腔镜手术包括耻骨后腹膜外腔的建立、排列成倒U字形5个穿刺套管的放置、前列腺被膜的切开、增生腺瘤的切除、前列腺部尿道的保护及前列腺被膜的缝合等主要步骤。结果9例病人手术顺利,术中出血(190±160.6)ml,范围为(60～600)ml,手术时间为(174±59.8)min,范围为(90～240)min。术后恢复顺利,尿管拔除时间为(8.4±3.8)d。术后3月复查病人尿流率、国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)评分、生活质量评分(QOL)等较术前明显好转。术前有性功能的4例病人术后性功能无损。结论对腺体大的前列腺增生症行腹腔镜下经耻骨后腹膜外行前列腺切除术是可行的,病人创伤小、恢复快、效果满意。     

经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生

目的 :评价经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除和前列腺组织粉碎术治疗良性前列腺增生 (BPH)的临床效果。　方法 :应用 10 0W钬激光器和组织粉碎器对 35例BPH病人实施经尿道钬激光剜除和前列腺组织粉碎术治疗。　结果 :本组 35例手术均获成功。手术时间 30～ 180min ,平均 (6 0 .0± 2 3.2 )min。获得前列腺组织 10～ 5 6g ,平均(31± 9) g ,术后留置导尿管时间 2 0h～ 4d ,平均1.5d。无术中术后输血病例。组织病理学诊断均为BPH。 32例获随访 ,术后 3个月随访国际前列腺症状评分 (IPSS)由 (2 4.0± 6 .2 )分降至 (5 .6± 3.6 )分 (P <0 .0 0 1)。最大尿流率 (Qmax)由 (8.5± 3.9)ml/s上升至 (2 2 .0± 7.2 )ml/s(P <0 .0 0 1) ,残余尿由 (138± 12 5 )ml减少到 (2 1± 15 )ml,未发生严重并发症。　结论 :钬激光前列腺剜除术是治疗BPH的有效微创方法 ,术中术后出血少 ,能够完整剜除增生的前列腺组织。留置导尿管时间短 ,临床症状改善明显。     

经尿道前列腺等离子与钬激光剜除术治疗前列腺增生的比较

目的探讨基层医院开展经尿道前列腺等离子剜除术（TUEP）和经尿道前列腺大功率钬激光剜除术（HoLEP）治疗老年男性前列腺增生患者的安全性和有效性。 方法回顾性分析贵阳市第四人民医院250例前列腺增生患者的住院病例资料,其中等离子组156例,钬激光组94例。统计比较两组患者的临床资料。 结果所有患者手术均取得成功,无中转开放手术病例,术后随访至少12个月。等离子组与钬激光组的基线资料比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。钬激光组患者术后血红蛋白变化[（1.2±0.5）g/L vs （2.3±0.8）g/L]和术后血生化血钠降低指数[（1.9±0.5）mmol/Lvs（3.1±1.5）mmol/L]变化较等离子组患者小,术后置尿管时间[（3.4±0.8）d vs （5.3±1.4）d]和住院时间[（4.5±1.9）d vs （6.7±2.5）d]比等离子组患者短,差异均有统计学意义（P<0.001）。等离子组与钬激光组患者术后3个月IPSS、RUV、Qmax和QOL均较术前改善（P<0.05）,随访期间无尿失禁发生,远期并发症差异无统计学意义（6/156 vs 4/94,P>0.05）。 结论TUEP与HoLEP治疗前列腺增生均安全、有效,远期疗效需进一步研究证实。     

Enucleation of the prostate: An anatomical perspective

Among transurethral surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) differs from conventional transurethral surgery as it adopts the same enucleation principle as open surgery. AEEP is known as an effective and safe surgical method. However, the learning curve is steep because the surgical anatomy is different from that of conventional transurethral surgery. If information on surgical anatomy related to enucleation is enriched and surgical standardisation is achieved, the learning curve will be shortened and AEEP will become more widespread. The concept of AEEP has been developed based on the surgical techniques obtained from holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP). The original surgical technique of HoLEP is a three-lobe technique. At the 12 o'clock position at the prostatic apex, the boundary of the prostate capsule is unclear. Separating anterior prostatic tissue from the prostatic capsule while preserving the sphincter in the apical area is one of the biggest challenges in AEEP. During the AEEP procedure, an accurate understanding of the surgical anatomy of the capsular plane, bladder neck, apical sphincteric area and blood vessels is important. In this article, literature on the anatomy related to enucleation in AEEP, mainly HoLEP, is reviewed and discussed.     

度他雄胺治疗良性前列腺增生的研究进展

良性前列腺增生(BPH)是中老年男性的常见病。目前,以5α还原酶抑制剂为主的药物治疗已经替代传统的经尿道前列腺切除术,成为多数BPH患者的首选治疗方案。本文就一种新型的5α还原酶抑制剂——度他雄胺对治疗BPH的研究进展进行综述。     

铥激光前列腺剥橘式切除术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗良性前列腺增生的比较研究

目的比较经尿道铥激光前列腺剥橘式切除术(TmLRP-TT)与经尿道前列腺电切术(TURP)的安全性和近期疗效。方法124例良性前列腺增生(BPH)患者随机分为2组,66例行TmLRP-TT,58例行TURP。术前2组年龄、前列腺体积、前列腺特异性抗原、国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、最大尿流率(Qmax)、剩余尿量(PVR)数值比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。监测并记录手术前后血电解质、手术时间、术后膀胱持续冲洗时间、导尿管留置时间、术后住院天数、手术并发症。术后3个月随访Qmax、PVR、IPSS、生活质量评分(QOL)等指标。对以上各项指标进行统计学分析。结果TmLRP-TT组和TURP组手术时间分别为(57.4±16.2)min及(50.9±13.9)min,导尿管留置时间(1.9±0.5)d及(3.6±0.7)d,术后住院天数分别为(4.8±1.4)d及(6.7±2.2)d,2组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。TmLRP-TT、组术中出血极少,术后无需膀胱冲洗,无低钠血症发生; TURP组有3.4%(2/58)术中输血,术后膀胱冲洗时间(2.7±0.6)d,44.8%(26/58)术后出现不同程度的低钠血症。术后3个月,2组患者IPSS、QOL、Qmax、PVR均较术前显著改善(P<0.01),而组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论与TURP相比,TmLRP-TT治疗BPH切割精准、出血少、恢复快、并发症少、安全性高,近期疗效和TURP相似,在临床上有良好的应用前景。     

钬激光前列腺剜除术与前列腺汽化电切术治疗良性前列腺增生的疗效比较

目的 比较经尿道前列腺汽化电切术与经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗前列腺增生症 的疗效。 方法 将160例前列腺增生症( benign prostatic hyperplasia,BPH)患者随机分为两组,每组80例,分别用 TUVP 及HoLEP 治疗 。比较两种术式 的手术时间、手术出血量、 膀胱冲洗时间 、住院时间、并发症及近期疗效等指标 。结果 两组患者术后国际前列腺症状评分 （IPSS）、生活质量评分（ QOL）、最大尿流率和残余尿量均较术前明显改善,但两组上述指标间比较差异无显著性差异 。HoLEP组术中出血量、术后膀胱冲洗时间、住院时间明显短于TUVP组;并发症发 生率低于TUVP组。 结论 TUVP 及HoLEP 治疗前列腺增生症均有效;HoLEP的手术安全性优于TUVP。     

经尿道国产1470nm激光汽化术治疗<30g小体积前列腺增生的临床体会

目的探讨经尿道国产1470nm激光汽化术治疗<30g小体积前列腺增生患者的安全性、有效性和远期并发症情况。方法回顾性研究2017年10月至2018年9月我院45例<30g小体积前列腺增生患者的临床资料,其中TURP组20例,1470 nm激光组25例。详细记录两组患者的临床资料、围手术期并发症和随访情况。结果45例患者手术均成功,术后平均随访时间12.6个月(9~16个月)。两组患者年龄、前列腺体积和IPSS、RUV、Qmax和QOL基线资料差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。TURP组和1470 nm激光组患者术后3个月IPSS、RUV、Qmax和QOL均较术前改善(P<0.05),组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。1470 nm激光组患者手术时间([48.6±13.6)min vs(56.8±11.7)min,P=0.038]、术后膀胱持续冲洗时间[(0.8±0.5)d vs(1.5±0.9)d,P=0.001]、导尿管留置时间([2.7±0.6)d vs(4.7±0.9)d,P<0.001]和住院时间([4.2±1.2)d vs(5.2±1.9)d,P=0.036]较TURP组患者明显缩短,术前术后血红蛋白浓度变化更小([5.5±2.4)g/L vs(11.6±2.7)g/L,P<0.01]。随访发现TURP组有2例出现尿道狭窄,1470 nm激光组无尿道狭窄病例发生。结论经尿道国产1470 nm激光汽化术治疗<30 g小体积前列腺增生安全有效,与传统TURP比较术中出血少,术后恢复时间更短,无尿道狭窄并发症发生,为BPH的个体化治疗提供了新的思路。     

The Holmium Laser for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Brief Review

At a wavelength of 2140 nm, the holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) laser can be used for incision, ablation and resection of prostatic tissue. This laser has revolutionised the surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in our institution. Five different techniques have been utilised in evolving the current techniques using the Ho:YAG laser either alone or in combination with neodymium:YAG (Nd:YAG laser for the surgical management of BPH. The clinical outcome of 664 patients undergoing these procedures is presented. Enucleation of the prostatic adenoma using the holmium laser energy is the most common procedure presently performed at our institution for the surgical management of BPH. A mechanical tissue morcellator appears to be the most efficient way to remove prostatic tissue, once enucleated, from within the bladder. Paper received 24 February 1998; accepted after revision 30 June 1998.     

前列腺钬激光整块剜除术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗前列腺增生的比较

目的对比前列腺钬激光整块剜除术（HoLEP）与经尿道前列腺电切术（TURP）在治疗前列腺增生（BPH）中的疗效。 方法行前瞻性研究,将医院2018年6月至2021年6月收治的76例BPH患者纳为研究对象,随机数字表法将其均分为HoLEP组及TURP组,比较两组围术期相关指标及术后恢复指标,探究两种术式在治疗BPH中的疗效。 结果HoLEP组手术时间较TURP组延长,血红蛋白下降值较TURP组低,前列腺切除重量较TURP组增加,差异均具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。HoLEP组手术前后电解质Na⁺及K⁺水平比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）,TURP组术后Na⁺及K⁺水平较其术前均下降,且其术后Na⁺及K⁺水平均低于HoLEP组术后水平,差异均具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。HoLEP组术后膀胱冲洗时间、留置导尿管时间及术后住院时间均短于TURP组,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。HoLEP组术后并发症发生率低于TURP组,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。术后6个月,两组国际前列腺症状评分（IPSS）、生活质量评分（QOL）、最大尿流率（Q_max）、残余尿以及最大尿流率时逼尿肌压力（Pdet/Q_max）水平比较,差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论HoLEP及TURP均能有效切除增生前列腺组织,改善BPH患者下尿路症状,实现治疗目的,但与TURP相比,HoLEP术后并发症更少,患者术后恢复更快。     

Evaluation for Madigan's prostatectomy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia

Aim: To comparatively evaluate the efficacy and post-operative complications of the Madigan's prostatectomy(MPC) and suprapubic prostatectomy (SPPC). Methods: A total of 43 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasiawere divided into two groups: 21 underwent MPC and 22, SPPC. In all the patients, the international prostate symp-tom score (IPSS) and urinary pressure-flow studies were assessed before and 6 months after operation. The InternationalContinence Society (ICS) nomogram, Abrams-Griffiths (AG) number and linear passive urethral resistance relationanalysis (L-PURR) were used to diagnose and grade bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). The IPSS and the urodynamicparameters before and after operation, as well as the advantages and post-operative complications were recorded andcompared. Results: Patients of both the MPC and SPPC groups had a significant improvement in IPSS and urody-namic parameters. Obstruction was relieved in 81.0% of MPC and 86.4% of SPPC patients. MPC has the advantagesof the absence o