Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of blue laser vaporization of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ren-Peng Yu, Ouyang Song, Hong Weng, Yong-Bo Wang, Bing-Hui Li, Hao Zi, Yu Hao, Qiang Li et al.

The Canadian journal of urology, 2026

1,713 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

While novel 450 nm blue laser vaporization of the prostate (BLVP) has emerged as a promising treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), comprehensive evidence-based validation remains lacking. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BLVP for BPH.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, and Wanfang database up to 1 September 2025 (an updated search was performed on 31 December 2025). Single-arm meta-analyses summarized the absolute efficacy and safety of BLVP. For the comparison of BLVP with other surgical procedures, head-to-head meta-analyses or descriptive systematic reviews were performed based on the homogeneity of studies.

RESULTS

Across 23 included studies (1713 participants), single-arm meta-analysis showed favorable perioperative outcomes: mean operative time (26.46 min), bladder irrigation time (14.96 h), catheterization time (2.67 d), and hemoglobin drop (6.96 g/L). Postoperative IPSS, Qmax, PVR, and QoL significantly improved with low complication rates. Compared with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), BLVP demonstrated favorable outcomes regarding shorter operation, irrigation, and catheterization times, less hemoglobin loss, and shorter hospital stays (all p < 0.05). While urinary functional recovery was comparable, BLVP exhibited lower risks of urinary incontinence (OR = 0.38) and secondary bleeding…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,713 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free