Evidence Hub

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate in treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: A meta-analysis of 13 randomized control trials

B. Daryanto, Wisnu Syahputra Suryanullah, Probo Yudha Pratama Putra

Current Urology, 2024

656 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background The prevalence of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in older men increases with age, beginning at 40–45 years and reaching to 60% by 60 years and 80% by 80 years. Surgical procedures such as holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) are the preferred treatments for BPH. Nevertheless, there is disagreement regarding the most efficient and safe treatment for BPH. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of HoLEP and TURP based on existing evidence. Materials and methods This meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. In February 2023, a literature review was conducted using PubMed, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library, and the meta-analysis was performed using RevMan V.5.4. Results A total of 656 patients underwent HoLEP, and 653 patients underwent TURP. There was no statistically significant difference in the International Prostate Symptom Score at 1 month or at 3, 6, 18, 24, and 36 months; the HoLEP group showed a significant difference at 12 months. The pooled data from the maximum urinary flow rate at 1–12 months revealed no significant findings, but the TURP group showed significant results at 24 months. Meanwhile, the HoLEP group showed significant postvoid residual results. There was no significant difference in the quality of life between the groups. Patients who underwent HoLEP had shorter hospital stay and catheter usage…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. 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: 656 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