Patient‐reported outcome and experience measures in prostate surgery (holmium laser enucleation and robot radical prostatectomy)

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 132-133
Author(s):  
Brecht Van Vaerenbergh ◽  
Marleen De Pauw
Author(s):  
Alexander Kretschmer ◽  
Elio Mazzone ◽  
Francesco Barletta ◽  
Riccardo Leni ◽  
Isabel Heidegger ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 764-769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul T. Gellhaus ◽  
M. Francesca Monn ◽  
Joshua Leese ◽  
Chandra K. Flack ◽  
James E. Lingeman ◽  
...  

Urology ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 421-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dane E. Klett ◽  
Mark D. Tyson ◽  
Chinedu O. Mmeje ◽  
Rafael Nunez–Nateras ◽  
Yu-Hui Chang ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A Assmus ◽  
Matthew S. Lee ◽  
Tim Large ◽  
Amy Krambeck

Introduction: Although holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is a highly effective surgery, there is a variable recovery period where patients may experience hematuria, dysuria, or urinary incontinence (UI). Despite preoperative consultation, there is a paucity of literature examining the effectiveness of physician-patient communication in preparing the patient for the postoperative recovery period. We sought to examine recovery expectations as a patient-reported outcome (PRO) metric for HoLEP. Methods: With institutional review board approval, we queried our electronic medical record and retrospective clinical registry to identify 50 consecutive patients that underwent HoLEP from November 2019 to March 2020 by two endourologists. Patients were provided questionnaires via Twistle© ≥6 months postoperatively. Patient demographics and perioperative course was examined in the context of responses. Our primary objective was determining whether patients felt they had a reasonable understanding of the recovery process. Results: We observed a 92% (46/50) response rate, with an average patient age of 69.4 years (range 55–88). Overall, 91.3% (42/46) felt they had a reasonable understanding of the recovery. Additionally, 97.8% (45/46) were aware of temporary UI, with 87% having ≥1 episodes of UI after catheter removal. We found 47.8% (22/46) of patients expected UI to resolve within 30 days, while 8.6% expected >90 days of UI. All patients were aware of the risk of hematuria, with 93.5% (43/46) expecting resolution within 30 days (<7 days: 47.8%; 7–14 days: 28.3%; 15–30 days: 17.4%). Conclusions: Although surgical technique continues to improve HoLEP, ensuring adequate physician-patient communication to optimize expectations is crucial. We report patient understanding of HoLEP recovery and areas for future improvement.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e046973
Author(s):  
Gautier Müllhaupt ◽  
Sabine Güsewell ◽  
Hans-Peter Schmid ◽  
Valentin Zumstein ◽  
Patrick Betschart ◽  
...  

IntroductionA novel method for the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) called Aquablation has become commercially available. Previous studies have been able to show similar functional results when compared with transurethral resection of the prostate and a high efficacy has been demonstrated when this approach is applied to patients with a prostate size of 80–150 cm3.Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) is a well-established procedure in the surgical treatment of BPH in prostate glands larger than 30 mL and a first-line therapy in glands over 80 mL. To date, no data are available whether Aquablation is non-inferior compared with HoLEP in the treatment of patients with medium-to-large-sized prostates regarding safety and efficacy.Methods and analysisThis is a prospective, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial conducted at a Swiss centre of tertiary care. The primary outcome is assessment of non-inferiority of Aquablation compared with HoLEP in reducing lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic obstruction measured by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Randomisation will be performed using secuTrial, stratifying on age (<70 years, 70+ years) and prostate volume (<100 mL, 100+ mL). Both interventions are performed in an inpatient setting and regular follow-up controls starting 8 weeks after intervention and continuing up to 5 years will be performed. The primary outcome (change in IPSS from baseline to 6 months) will be tested for non-inferiority with a one-sided t-test. Secondary outcomes, such as efficacy parameters, several patient-reported outcome measures, and periprocedural and safety parameters will be described by calculating means or relative frequencies for each treatment group and testing differences with two-sided standard superiority tests.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the local ethics committee (EKOS 2020-02353). Results of the primary endpoint and each of the secondary endpoints will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04560907).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document