title: [Long-term outcome after endoscopic enucleation of the prostate : From monopolar enucleation to HoLEP and from HoLEP to EEP].
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In the last 20 years various transurethral endoscopic enucleation techniques (EEP) have been established as a substitute for open prostatectomy (OP) and TURP. Since the 2016 update of the "EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), including Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO)", Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and bipolar enucleation being summarized as anatomical enucleating techniques are proposed as first choice for the surgical management of BPO of large volume prostates.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this review is to demonstrate the available data on long-term outcomes of current EEP techniques.
  
  
  METHODS
  PubMed/Medline and Scopus were searched using the terms: long term, HoLEP, ThuLEP, ThuVEP, DiLEP, ELEP, GreenlEP, Greenlight enucleation, bipolar enucleation, plasmakinetic enucleation, monopolar enucleation, and transurethral enucleation. Studies with a follow-up ≥48 months were selected.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In all, 5 randomized controlled trials (2 HoLEP, 2 bipolar enucleation, 1 Thulium laser resection of the prostate in tangerine technique [TmLR-TT]), 3 prospective cohort studies (2 thulium vapoenucleation [ThuVEP], 1 TmLRP-TT), and 2 retrospective studies with large patient cohorts were selected. All EEP were equivalent to OP with regard to effectivity and durability of results. The rate of secondary surgical procedures in HolEP, ThuVEP, bipolar enucleation and tangerine technique (TmLRP-TT) was 0-1.2 % for reTURP, 1.9-3.75 % for urethrotomy, and 0.9-4 % for bladder neck resection. No significant difference in the individual studies was found when compared to OP. For bipolar enucleation vs. TURP long-term results for uroflow, residual urine, and IPSS were significantly better at 60 months for bipolar enucleation. One RCT TmLRP-TT vs. TURP at the 48-month follow-up found no significant difference.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Various transurethral EEP can be considered as equally safe and effective anatomical enucleation techniques. All displayed EEPs match the durability of OP. The choice of energy source for EEP seems to be secondary and a function of resources and personal preference of the skilled surgeon.
authors.affiliation: Klinik für Urologie und urologische Onkologie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH), Carl Neuberg Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Deutschland. Herrmann.Thomas@mh-hannover.de.
authors.forename: T R W
authors.initials: TR
authors.lastname: Herrmann
mesh_terms: D004724:Endoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006801:Humans; D053685:Laser Therapy / Q000379:methods*; D053844:Lasers, Solid-State / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D008297:Male; D019060:Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D011468:Prostatectomy / Q000379:methods*; D011470:Prostatic Hyperplasia / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
keywords: Adenoma recurrence; Bipolar enucleation; Prostate obstruction, benign; ThuLEP; ThuVEP