Safety and Feasibility of Outpatient Surgery in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Stefano Salciccia, Francesco Del Giudice, Martina Maggi, Michael Eisenberg, Benjamin I Chung, Simon L Conti, Alex Kasman, Fernandino L Vilson, Matteo Ferro, Giuseppe Lucarelli, Pietro Viscuso, Giovanni Di Pierro, Gian Maria Busetto, Marta Luzi, Isabella Sperduti, Gian Piero Ricciuti, Ettore De Berardinis, Alessandro Sciarra

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


PURPOSE: Most of endourological procedures along the urinary tract have been widely practiced as outpatient operations, including surgery for BPH. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess safety and feasibility of outpatient surgery for patients suffering from symptomatic BPH candidate for endoscopic disobstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Embase were searched up until March 30, 2020. MINORS tool was utilized to assess the quality of included studies and a pooled measure of failure or event rate (FR, ER) estimate was calculated. Further sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression were conducted to investigate contribution of moderators to heterogeneity.

RESULTS: Twenty studies with a total of 1626 patients treated according to outpatient criteria for endoscopic BPH surgery were included. In total, 18 studies reporting data on immediate hospital readmission and/or inability to discharge after endoscopic procedure presented FR estimates ranging from 1.7% to 51.1%. Pooled FR estimate was 7.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.2%-10.3%); Heterogeneity: Q=76.85; d.f.=17, p<.001; I2= 75.12%. Subgroup analysis according to surgical technique revealed difference among the three approaches with pooled FR of 3% (95%CI: 1%-4.9%), 7.1% (95%CI: 3.9-10.4) and 11.8% (95%CI: 7-16.7%) for TURP, Green-light and HoLEP respectively (p<.001). At meta-regression analysis, none of the retrieved covariates were able to significantly influence the cumulative outcomes reported. ER for postoperative complications and early outpatient visit showed a pooled estimate of 18.6% (95%CI: 13.2%-23.9%) and 7.7% (95%CI: 4.3%-11%) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis revealed how transurethral procedures for BPH on an outpatient setting are overall reliable and safe. Of note, there were significant outcome differences between groups with regard of type of surgical procedure, perioperative prostate volume and discharge protocol suggesting the need for further prospective analysis to better elucidate the best strategy in such outpatient conduct.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Endourology
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - Oct 21 2020


Dive into the research topics of 'Safety and Feasibility of Outpatient Surgery in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this