Comparison of potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser vaporization of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate: update of a prospective non-randomized two-centre study.

Objectives: To evaluate the intermediate-term clinical efficacy and the rate of complications in 80 W photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) with the potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser (Greenlight, (AMS, Minnetonka, MN, USA) compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in a prospective non-randomised two-centre study.

Patients And Methods: From December 2003 to August 2006, 396 patients (PVP 269, TURP 127) with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia were included in the study. There was a significant difference in mean age (72 years for PVP vs 68 for TURP, P = 0.001). Patients were therefore stratified in age categories (<70, 70-80, >80 years) and compared for perioperative variables, functional outcome and complications, with a follow-up of up to 24 months.

Results: The mean prostate size was greater (overall, 62 vs 48 mL, P < 0.001) and mean operative duration longer (overall 72 vs 53 min; P = 0.001) for PVP in all age categories. The rate of intraoperative bleeding (3% vs 11%), blood transfusions (0% vs 5.5%) and capsule perforations (0.4% vs 6.3%), and early postoperative clot retention (0.4% vs 3.9%) was significantly lower for PVP. Hospitalization time was significantly shorter in the PVP group for patients aged <70 years (3.0 vs 4.7 days) and 70-80 years (4.0 vs 5.0 days; P = 0.001). The improvement of peak urinary flow rate was higher after TURP for any age category. The International Prostate Symptom Score and postvoid residual volume during the follow-up showed no significant difference. After 12 months the overall prostate size reduction was 63% (-30 mL) after TURP and 44% (-27 mL) after PVP. The rate of repeat TURP/PVP was higher in the PVP group (6.7% vs 3.9%, not significant) within the follow-up of up to 2 years. The incidence of urethral and bladder neck strictures was comparable.

Conclusions: PVP was more favourable in terms of perioperative safety. Although patients assigned for PVP were older and had larger prostates, PVP resulted in a similar functional outcome. Further follow-up is needed to draw final conclusions about the long-term efficacy of PVP.