Urodynamics after TURP and HoLEP in urodynamically obstructed patients: Are there any differences at 1 year of follow-up?

Lorenzo Rigatti, Richard Naspro, Andrea Salonia, Antonella Centemero, Massimo Ghezzi, Giorgio Guazzoni, Alberto Briganti, Patrizio Rigatti, Francesco Montorsi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Objectives: To compare urodynamic findings after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia-related bladder outlet obstruction. Methods: From January to October 2002, 100 consecutive patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia with obstructive lower urinary tract symptoms were randomized to surgical treatment with either HoLEP (group 1, n = 52) or TURP (group 2, n = 48). All patients were preoperatively assessed using the International Prostate Symptom Score and quality-of-life question, total serum prostate-specific antigen measurement, transrectal ultrasonography, and complete urodynamic study. The operative time, catheterization time, and overall hospital stay were also recorded for both groups. All patients were assessed at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively using a complete urodynamic evaluation. Results: All patients were obstructed preoperatively (Schäfer grade greater than 2). Both groups were comparable in terms of age, total serum prostate-specific antigen level, International Prostate Symptom Score, and urodynamic results. At 1, 6, and 12 months of follow-up, no statistically significant differences were recorded in terms of detrussor pressure at maximal urinary flow rate, Schäfer grade (linear passive urethral resistance relation), maximal urinary flow rate, International Prostate Symptom Score, and quality-of-life score. In the HoLEP group, the catheterization time and hospital stay were significantly shorter. Transitory lower urinary tract symptoms after 3 months of follow-up and dysuria were more frequent in the HoLEP group than in the TURP group, although at 12 months of follow-up, the results were comparable. Conclusions: Both HoLEP and TURP were equally effective in relieving bladder outlet obstruction. Although associated with greater early self-resolving irritative symptoms, HoLEP can guarantee a shorter catheterization time and hospital stay with longer operative times, proposing itself as an attractive alternative to standard TURP.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1193-1198
Number of pages6
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2006

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology


Dive into the research topics of 'Urodynamics after TURP and HoLEP in urodynamically obstructed patients: Are there any differences at 1 year of follow-up?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this