Office treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia

The less invasive procedures described herein are suitable for use in the office setting. Improvement in symptoms and quality of life are similar to that achieved with TURP. With the exception of TUIP, flow rate improvement is less than with TURP. TURP, however, tends to produce a "super normal" flow rate, which may be unnecessary. Patients are concerned regarding symptoms and quality of life and the avoidance of complications. In regard to decreased complications, less invasive procedures have an advantage. The main concern with these new treatments, with the exception of TUIP, is durability. Treatment failure may lead to other treatments, thereby increasing overall management costs. In this regard, it must be remembered that there is a significant treatment failure rate with TURP. Although patients failing less invasive treatments are likely to be offered other treatments, this is less likely after an adequate TURP. Therefore, when results are compared, it may be more appropriate to evaluate failure rates based on symptoms and quality of life rather than on the use of additional treatments. More patient follow-up for a longer period of time will be required before a definite answer is available on durability. All of the procedures described herein can be performed to a variable extent using topical anesthesia. TUNA has been performed using topical lidocaine alone but frequently requires intravenous sedation/analgesia and, in some instances, a regional block. If the patient can tolerate rigid cystoscopy fairly well, topical anesthesia alone may suffice. Similar requirements for anesthesia apply to ILC with the Nd:YAG or indigo systems. Using the Targis (T3) microwave device, Peterson and co-workers reported that 60% of patients were treated with topical urethral lidocaine alone, whereas 40% also received oral Toradol. Djavan (personal communication) using the Targis (T3) device randomized patients to topical urethral anesthesia alone or combined with intravenous sedoanalgesia. Pain was evaluated using a 0 to 10 visual analog scale score. At the commencement of treatment, the mean score was 1.4 in the topical anesthesia alone group and 1.3 in the sedoanalgesia group. During therapy, the score increased to a peak at 30 minutes of 2.2 and 2.0 in the topical and sedoanalgesia groups, respectively. After this, the visual analog score declined, falling to 0.2 and 0.1, respectively, by 1 hour following treatment. This study shows that microwave treatment with the Targis (T3) system is well-tolerated using topical urethral anesthesia alone. No difference was observed between outcomes in the two groups. Capital and operating costs as well as reimbursement issues are important in the introduction of these treatments into the office; however, until more information is available on the durability of results, the cost-effectiveness of these newer treatments remains unclear.