Comparative efficacy and safety of greenlight and thulium laser vaporization techniques for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Lasers in Medical Science Pub Date : 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1007/s10103-024-04143-7
Luheng Zhao, Xiaojia Yu, Zhihu Zhu, Xinglong Gu, Zhiyong Zhou, Yong Li
{"title":"Comparative efficacy and safety of greenlight and thulium laser vaporization techniques for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Luheng Zhao, Xiaojia Yu, Zhihu Zhu, Xinglong Gu, Zhiyong Zhou, Yong Li","doi":"10.1007/s10103-024-04143-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of greenlight (PVP) and thulium laser vaporization (ThuVAP) in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) treatment. A systematic literature search was conducted in databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CNKI, Wangfang, and VIP in November 2023. Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the primary outcomes of interest were performed. The review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42023491316. A total of 13 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared to PVP, ThuVAP had a shorter operation time (MD: 8.56, 95% CI: 4.10 ~ 13.03, p = 0.0002), and higher postoperative transfusion (OR:0.26, 95% CI: 0.10 ~ 0.64, p = 0.004). However, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of length of stay (MD: -0.32, 95% CI: -0.78 ~ 0.14, p = 0.17), catherization time (MD: 0.03, 95% CI: -0.13 ~ 0.19, p = 0.73), international prostate symptom score improvement (MD: 0.23, 95% CI: -0.36 ~ 0.81, p = 0.45), quality of life improvement (MD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.04 ~ 0.12, p = 0.29), maximum urinary flow rate improvement (MD: -0.59, 95% CI: -1.42 ~ 0.24, p = 0.16), postvoid residual urine volume improvement (MD: 1.04, 95% CI: -6.63 ~ 8.71, p = 0.79), overall postoperative complications (OR:1.15, 95% CI: 0.65 ~ 2.03, p = 0.63), postoperative bleeding (OR:1.18, 95%  CI: 0.67 ~ 2.07, p = 0.56), re-peration (OR:0.55, 95% CI: 0.16 ~ 1.95, p = 0.35), urethral stricture (OR:0.90, 95% CI: 0.46 ~ 1.75, p = 0.75), and urinary incontinence (OR:1.07, 95% CI: 0.64 ~ 1.78, p = 0.80). The results of subgroup analysis showed that the results of comparing thulium vaporesection or vapoenucleation with PVP were consistent with the results of the pooled analysis. Both greenlight and thulium laser vaporization are effective and safe, with comparable surgical and functional outcomes. The choice between these methods should be based on patient-specific factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":17978,"journal":{"name":"Lasers in Medical Science","volume":"39 1","pages":"190"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lasers in Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-024-04143-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of greenlight (PVP) and thulium laser vaporization (ThuVAP) in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) treatment. A systematic literature search was conducted in databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CNKI, Wangfang, and VIP in November 2023. Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the primary outcomes of interest were performed. The review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42023491316. A total of 13 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared to PVP, ThuVAP had a shorter operation time (MD: 8.56, 95% CI: 4.10 ~ 13.03, p = 0.0002), and higher postoperative transfusion (OR:0.26, 95% CI: 0.10 ~ 0.64, p = 0.004). However, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of length of stay (MD: -0.32, 95% CI: -0.78 ~ 0.14, p = 0.17), catherization time (MD: 0.03, 95% CI: -0.13 ~ 0.19, p = 0.73), international prostate symptom score improvement (MD: 0.23, 95% CI: -0.36 ~ 0.81, p = 0.45), quality of life improvement (MD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.04 ~ 0.12, p = 0.29), maximum urinary flow rate improvement (MD: -0.59, 95% CI: -1.42 ~ 0.24, p = 0.16), postvoid residual urine volume improvement (MD: 1.04, 95% CI: -6.63 ~ 8.71, p = 0.79), overall postoperative complications (OR:1.15, 95% CI: 0.65 ~ 2.03, p = 0.63), postoperative bleeding (OR:1.18, 95%  CI: 0.67 ~ 2.07, p = 0.56), re-peration (OR:0.55, 95% CI: 0.16 ~ 1.95, p = 0.35), urethral stricture (OR:0.90, 95% CI: 0.46 ~ 1.75, p = 0.75), and urinary incontinence (OR:1.07, 95% CI: 0.64 ~ 1.78, p = 0.80). The results of subgroup analysis showed that the results of comparing thulium vaporesection or vapoenucleation with PVP were consistent with the results of the pooled analysis. Both greenlight and thulium laser vaporization are effective and safe, with comparable surgical and functional outcomes. The choice between these methods should be based on patient-specific factors.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
绿光和铥激光汽化技术治疗良性前列腺增生的疗效和安全性比较:系统综述和荟萃分析。
本荟萃分析评估了绿光(PVP)和铥激光汽化(ThuVAP)治疗良性前列腺增生症(BPH)的有效性和安全性。2023 年 11 月,在 PubMed、Cochrane Library、EMBASE、CNKI、Wangfang 和 VIP 等数据库中进行了系统性文献检索。按照 PRISMA 指南,对主要研究结果进行了系统综述和荟萃分析。该综述在 PROSPERO 上进行了前瞻性注册,注册号为 CRD42023491316。共纳入了 13 项研究。荟萃分析结果显示,与 PVP 相比,ThuVAP 的手术时间更短(MD:8.56,95% CI:4.10 ~ 13.03,p = 0.0002),术后输血量更高(OR:0.26,95% CI:0.10 ~ 0.64,p = 0.004)。然而,两组患者在住院时间(MD:-0.32,95% CI:-0.78 ~ 0.14,P = 0.17)、导管插入时间(MD:0.03,95% CI:-0.13 ~ 0.19,P = 0.73)、国际前列腺症状评分改善(MD:0.23,95% CI:-0.36 ~ 0.81,P = 0.45)、生活质量改善(MD:0.04,95% CI:-0.04 ~ 0.12,P = 0.29)、最大尿流率改善(MD:-0.59,95% CI:-1.42 ~ 0.24,P = 0.16)、排空后残余尿量改善(MD:1.04,95% CI:-6.63 ~ 8.71,P = 0.79)、术后总体并发症(OR:1.15,95% CI:0.65 ~ 2.03,P = 0.63)、术后出血(OR:1.18,95% CI:0.67 ~ 2.07,P = 0.56)、再次手术(OR:0.55,95% CI:0.16 ~ 1.95,P = 0.35)、尿道狭窄(OR:0.90,95% CI:0.46 ~ 1.75,P = 0.75)和尿失禁(OR:1.07,95% CI:0.64 ~ 1.78,P = 0.80)。亚组分析结果显示,铥激光汽化切口或汽化去核术与 PVP 的比较结果与汇总分析结果一致。绿光和铥激光汽化术均有效且安全,手术和功能结果相当。在选择这两种方法时,应根据患者的具体情况而定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Lasers in Medical Science
Lasers in Medical Science 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Lasers in Medical Science (LIMS) has established itself as the leading international journal in the rapidly expanding field of medical and dental applications of lasers and light. It provides a forum for the publication of papers on the technical, experimental, and clinical aspects of the use of medical lasers, including lasers in surgery, endoscopy, angioplasty, hyperthermia of tumors, and photodynamic therapy. In addition to medical laser applications, LIMS presents high-quality manuscripts on a wide range of dental topics, including aesthetic dentistry, endodontics, orthodontics, and prosthodontics. The journal publishes articles on the medical and dental applications of novel laser technologies, light delivery systems, sensors to monitor laser effects, basic laser-tissue interactions, and the modeling of laser-tissue interactions. Beyond laser applications, LIMS features articles relating to the use of non-laser light-tissue interactions.
期刊最新文献
Does the holmium laser have a place in the treatment of pilonidal cysts? (Pilolas study). Effects of femtosecond laser on hard dental tissues: A scoping review. Comparative evaluation of healing using Er, Cr: YSGG laser treatment with conventional method after extraction of permanent teeth: an in-vivo study. Photobiomodulation in recurrent aphthous stomatitis management using three different laser wavelengths. A randomized clinical trial. Effect of photobiomodulation and corticopuncture methods on tooth displacement and gene expression: animal study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1