42 However, few robust data on the long-term outcomes and reoperation rates associated with these procedures exist at this time.43 Efficacy Currently, six RCTs are available: four comparing PVP with TURP44–47 and two comparing PVP with OP (Table

1).47,48 Bouchier-Hayes and colleagues showed that the improvement of voiding variables was similar in the two groups with a mean increase in Qmax of 136% and a 61% mean IPSS improvement for the 80 W laser group.45 However, one study in patients with large prostates reported a significant difference in IPSS and Qmax at 6 months in favor Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical of TURP.44 When compared with OP, 80 W laser showed similar improvement in IPSS score, QoL, and Qmax, whereas there Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical was a statistically significantly greater reduction of prostate volume after OP.47 For small to midsized prostates, Hamann and colleagues and Ruszat and associates demonstrated that the KTP laser may be equivalent to TURP.49,50 For larger prostates, however, further prospective studies are warranted. It is not unlikely that these studies incorporating the 120 W LBO laser could potentially tackle larger

prostates more efficiently and overcome the current significantly Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical longer operating times of the KTP laser. One RCT showed equivalent results to TURP51 at 1-year follow-up, whereas another study comparing KTP treatment with OP showed equivalence in Qmax improvement, PVR, and symptom score reduction at 18-month follow-up.52 Prostate-specific antigen (PSA), as a surrogate marker of tissue removal, decreased by 68.2% with OP and 61.2% with PVP.52 However, other studies have reported much lower rates for PSA reduction using PVP, including 45%,53 41.7%,54 and 37%55 reduction. Only one RCT and

a few case studies evaluating the safety and efficacy Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical of the GreenLight HPS® (American Medical Systems, Minnetonka, MN) prostatectomy have been published. Al-Ansari and colleagues46 compared the new HPS 120 W laser machine with TURP. There was dramatic improvement in Qmax, IPSS, and PVR and the degree of improvement Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical was comparable in both groups during 36-month follow-up. Fulvestrant Intraoperative and early operative complications were in favor of GreenLight HPS, whereas more patients treated with laser had dysuria/urge compared with patients who had TURP. Intraoperative Complications Several studies have proven the Dichloromethane dehalogenase intraoperative safety of PVP with KTP and LBO lasers. An RCT comparing 80 W KTP with TURP demonstrated significantly smaller blood loss in KTP (0.45 g/dL) versus TURP (1.46 g/dL; P < .005), resulting in a blood transfusion rate in TURP.45 Another RCT of 80 W KTP compared with TURP supported these findings with a blood transfusion rate of 8.1% for TURP.44 In an RCT comparing LBO with OP, the transfusion rate was 0% following KTP, but 13.3% for OP.52 A total of 7.69% of patients in the KTP group required intraoperative conversion to TURP for the control of bleeding, most probably due to capsule perforation.