title: Holmium laser enucleation versus photoselective vaporization for prostatic adenoma greater than 60 ml: preliminary results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To our knowledge we report the first single center, prospective, randomized study comparing holmium laser enucleation and high performance GreenLight™ prostate photoselective vaporization as surgical treatment of prostatic adenomas greater than 60 ml.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 80 patients with a large prostatic adenoma were randomly assigned to surgical treatment with holmium laser enucleation or photoselective vaporization. International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function-15, maximum flow rate, post-void residual urine, serum prostate specific antigen and transrectal ultrasound volume were recorded.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Patient baseline characteristics were similar for holmium laser enucleation and photoselective vaporization. Operative time and catheter removal time were almost equal in the 2 groups (p = 0.7 and 0.2, respectively). Eight vaporization cases were converted to transurethral prostate resection or holmium laser enucleation intraoperatively due to bleeding. A significantly higher maximum flow rate and lower post-void residual urine were noted in holmium laser cases during the entire followup (at 1 year each p = 0.02). However, no significant difference in International Prostate Symptom Score, quality of life or International Index of Erectile Function-15 was detected. Prostate volume and serum PSA decreased 78% and 88% in the holmium laser group, and 52% and 60% in the vaporization group, respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Holmium laser enucleation and photoselective vaporization are effective for lower urinary tract symptoms due to a large prostatic adenoma. Early subjective functional results (maximum flow rate and post-void residual urine) of holmium laser enucleation appear to be superior to those of photoselective vaporization. In our hands cases intended to be treated with photoselective vaporization were at 22% risk of conversion to another modality. This could reflect our determination to vaporize to the capsule in all vaporization cases.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
authors.forename: Hazem
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Elmansy
authors.forename: Abdulaziz
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Baazeem
authors.forename: Ahmed
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kotb
authors.forename: Hesham
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Badawy
authors.forename: Essam
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Riad
authors.forename: Ashraf
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Emran
authors.forename: Mostafa
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Elhilali
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D053685:Laser Therapy / Q000295:instrumentation*; D053844:Lasers, Solid-State / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D008297:Male; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011467:Prostate / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000601:surgery; D011470:Prostatic Hyperplasia / Q000150:complications / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D020728:Transurethral Resection of Prostate / Q000379:methods*; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014463:Ultrasonography; D001748:Urinary Bladder Neck Obstruction / Q000209:etiology / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D014563:Urodynamics; D014835:Volatilization