Feasibility assessment of catheter-free water vapor thermal therapy for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

PURPOSE: To investigate safety and feasibility of performing water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT; Rezum, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) without postoperative catheterization among men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. METHODS: This is a prospective, single arm, unblinded pilot study of 20 consecutive male patients ages 40-80 who underwent WVTT at a single academic institution. All patients underwent 1 injection per lobe at the point of maximal obstruction based on visualization. Primary outcome was evaluation of voiding parameters, symptom scores, and need for catheterization at 3 day, 1, 3, and 6 month follow up compared to baseline visit 30 days prior to surgery. RESULTS: Mean age was 65 years (range 55-75). Mean prostate volume and PVR were 43 cc (range 30-68) and 89 cc, with 30% (n = 6) having median lobes. Patients received 2-3 treatments based on presence of bilobar versus trilobar hyperplasia. One patient (55 cc prostate, no median lobe) required catheterization for acute urinary retention on postoperative day 2. No patients required antibiotics for urinary tract infection or inpatient readmission within 30 days. Qmax significantly increased from 6 mL/s to 8, 13, 12, and 14 at 3 days, 1, 3, and 6 months (p < 0.05). IPSS decreased from 17 preoperatively to 10, 6, 7, and 8 (p < 0.05). No significant differences were noted in PVR, IIEF, MSHQ-EjD, or SF-12. CONCLUSIONS: In well-selected men, catheter-free WVTT is feasible and improved voiding parameters and symptom scores. No changes in sexual function, infectious complications, or readmission were noted. Only 1 patient (5%) required postoperative catheterization within 30 days.

Is water vapor thermal therapy safe and feasible in elderly and frail men? The Italian experience.

PURPOSE: In recent years, water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) has spread as minimally invasive technique in lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment. Even if its safety and feasibility have been largely proved in young men, nobody has proved the same feasibility and safety in the elderly (men older than 75 years old). Our aim is to compare WVTT safety outcomes in men older than 75 with younger men. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on men who underwent water vapor thermal therapy from 2019. We compared data on operative time, number of injections, intra-operative and post-operative complications, reinterventions rate. RESULTS: We enrolled 426 patients; among these, 60 were older than 75 years old, 366 were younger. Our cohorts of patients had similar results in terms of intra-operative and post-operative complications. Operative time accounts about 11 min for both groups (p = 0.535), total number of injections was seven for young men and eight for elderly (p = 0.314). We found no intra-operative complications in elderly men group and only one in the younger group (p = 0.678), while five younger men underwent clot retention, and two elderly men experienced this complication (p = 0.239). Only one transfusion occurred in the elderly group. No differences between groups occurred in terms of length of stay, post-operative urinary retention and reintervention rate, while catheterization time was longer in the elderly men. CONCLUSION: WVTT is a safe procedure in elderly patients with comparable intra-operative and post-operative complication rate in comparison with younger patients.

Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Attributed to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH): AUA Guideline Amendment 2023.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this American Urological Association (AUA) Guideline amendment is to provide a useful reference on the effective evidence-based management of male lower urinary tract symptoms secondary/attributed to BPH (LUTS/BPH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Minnesota Evidence Review Team searched Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) database to identify studies relevant to the management of BPH. The guideline was updated in 2023 to capture eligible literature published between September 2020 and October 2022. When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence was assigned a strength rating of A (high), B (moderate), or C (low) for support of Strong, Moderate, or Conditional Recommendations. In the absence of sufficient evidence, additional information is provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions. RESULTS: The BPH amendment resulted in changes to statements/supporting text on combination therapy, photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP), water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT), laser enucleation, and prostate artery embolization (PAE). A new statement on temporary implanted prostatic devices (TIPD) was added. In addition, statements on transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) and transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) were removed and information regarding these legacy technologies was added to the background section. References and the accompanying treatment algorithms were updated to align with the updated text. CONCLUSION: This guideline seeks to improve clinicians' ability to evaluate and treat patients with BPH/LUTS based on currently available evidence. Future studies will be essential to further support these statements to improve patient care.

Terapia termal con vapor de agua: variaciones técnicas entre hospitales universitarios españoles y eficacia a 2 años de seguimiento / Water vapor thermal therapy: technical variations among spanish hospitals and efficacy at 2-year follow-up

Objetivo El objetivo de este trabajo es conocer experiencia inicial con la terapia térmica con vapor de agua (TTVA) para hiperplasia benigna de próstata (HBP) en los hospitales universitarios españoles, así como describir las diferencias en cuanto a técnica y seguimiento observadas entre los centros. Materiales y métodos Este estudio multicéntrico observacional retrospectivo recogió características basales, datos quirúrgicos, posoperatorios y seguimiento a los uno, tres, seis, 12 y 24 meses, incluyendo cuestionarios validados, variaciones flujométricas, complicaciones y la necesidad de tratamiento farmacológico y quirúrgico tras el procedimiento. También se analizaron los posibles desencadenantes de retención aguda de orina (RAO) en el posoperatorio. Resultados Se incluyeron un total de 105 pacientes. No se observaron diferencias entre los grupos con y sin RAO con respecto a tiempo de sondaje (cinco y 4,3 días respectivamente, p = 0,178), ni volumen prostático (47,9 y 41,4 g, respectivamente, p = 0,147). La mejoría media a los tres, seis, 12 y 24 meses en cuanto de flujo máximo fue de 5,3, 5,2, 4,2 y 3,8 mL/s, respectivamente. En cuanto a la eyaculación, se observa una mejoría en la misma a partir de los tres meses de seguimiento que se mantiene en el tiempo. Conclusiones El tratamiento mínimamente invasivo de HBP con TTVA presenta buenos resultados funcionales a 24 meses de seguimiento, sin afectación significativa de la función sexual y con una baja incidencia de complicaciones. Existen pequeñas variaciones principalmente en cuanto al posoperatorio inmediato entre los hospitales participantes en el estudio. (AU)

Aim The aim of this work is to evaluate the initial experience with water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in Spanish university hospitals, as well as to describe the differences in technique and follow-up between centers. Materials and Methods This retrospective observational multicenter study collected baseline characteristics, surgical, postoperative and follow-up data at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, including validated questionnaires, flowmetric variations, complications, and the need for pharmacological or surgical treatment following the procedure. Possible triggers for postoperative acute urinary retention (AUR) were also analyzed. Results A total of 105 patients were included. No differences were observed between the groups with and without AUR with respect to catheterization time (5 and 4.3 days respectively, p = 0.178), or prostate volume (47.9 gr and 41.4 gr respectively, p = 0.147). The mean improvement at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months in terms of peak flow was 5.3, 5.2, 4.2 and 3.8 ml/s, respectively. As for ejaculation, an improvement was observed after 3 months of follow-up and was maintained over time. Conclusions Minimally invasive treatment for BPH with WVTT shows good functional outcomes at 24 months follow-up, without significant impairment of sexual function and a low incidence of complications. There are minor inter-hospital variations, mainly in the immediate postoperative period. (AU)

Prospective Trial of Water Vapor Thermal Therapy for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in Subjects with a Large Prostate: 6- and 12-month Outcomes.

Background: Current guidelines recommend Rezum water vapor thermal therapy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) for prostate glands ranging in volume from 30 to 80 cm3. Few prospective studies have specifically evaluated the use of Rezum for larger prostates. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of water vapor thermal therapy in patients with a prostate gland >80 cm3 and ≤150 cm3. Design setting and participants: In this prospective, single-arm study at seven centers in the USA, subjects were males aged >50 yr with symptomatic BPH and prostate volume of >80 cm3 and ≤150 cm3. Intervention: Rezum was used to deliver sterile water vapor via a transurethral approach to ablate targeted areas of prostate tissue. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary efficacy outcome was response to therapy, defined on a per-patient basis as a ≥30% improvement in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) from baseline to 6 mo. The primary safety outcome was a composite of serious device-related safety events. Secondary outcomes included catheterization for device-related retention. IPSS outcomes over time were analyzed via generalized estimating equations. Results and limitations: Among 47 eligible patients, prostate volume ranged from 80.8 to 148.1 cm3. All patients completed 6-mo follow-up, and 40/47completed 12-mo follow-up. At 6 mo, 83% were treatment responders according to the primary efficacy endpoint. The mean IPSS improvement at 6 mo was 11.9 ± 7.5 points, reflecting significant improvement. The primary safety outcome was met, with no occurrence of device-related composite safety events. The study is limited by the nonrandomized design and early termination, unrelated to safety or effectiveness. Conclusions: Our results are consistent with previous findings for prostate glands of up to 80 cm3, and indicate the safety and efficacy of Rezum for BPH in patients with a larger prostate. Patient summary: Rezum therapy, in which water vapor is used to treat targeted areas of the prostate, is currently recommended for patients with benign enlargement of the prostate and a prostate size of up to 80 cm3. We found that this treatment was also effective and safe in patients with a larger prostate of 80-150 cm3.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative first- and second-line treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgical therapies, such as water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) and prostatic urethral lift (PUL), are typically second-line options for patients in whom medical management (MM) failed but who are unwilling or unsuitable to undergo invasive transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). However, the incremental cost-effectiveness of WVTT or PUL as first- or second-line therapy is unknown. We evaluated the incremental cost-effectiveness of alternative first- and second-line treatments for patients with moderate-to-severe benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in Singapore to help policymakers make subsidy decisions based on value for money. METHODS: We considered six stepped-up treatment strategies, beginning with MM, WVTT, PUL or TURP. In each strategy, patients requiring retreatment advance to a more invasive treatment until TURP, which may be undergone twice. A Markov cohort model was used to simulate transitions between BPH severity states and retreatment, accruing costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a lifetime horizon. RESULTS: In moderate patients, strategies beginning with MM had similar cost and effectiveness, and first-line WVTT was incrementally cost-effective to first-line MM (33,307 SGD/QALY). First-line TURP was not incrementally cost-effective to first-line WVTT (159,361 SGD/QALY). For severe patients, WVTT was incrementally cost-effective to MM as a first-line treatment (30,133 SGD/QALY) and to TURP as a second-line treatment following MM (6877 SGD/QALY). TURP was incrementally cost-effective to WVTT as a first-line treatment (48,209 SGD/QALY) in severe patients only. All pathways involving PUL were dominated (higher costs and lower QALYs). CONCLUSION: Based on the common willingness-to-pay threshold of SGD 50,000/QALY, this study demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of WVTT over MM as first-line treatment for patients with moderate or severe BPH, suggesting it represents good value for money and should be considered for subsidy. PUL is not cost-effective as a first- nor second-line treatment. For patients with severe BPH, TURP as first-line is also cost-effective.

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a non-cancerous enlargement of the prostate, common among older men. Its symptoms include difficulties with starting and completing urination, incontinence, frequent and urgent need to urinate. Minimally invasive procedures, such as water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) and prostatic urethral lift (PUL), are typically offered as second-line options to patients for whom medication has failed but who are unwilling or unsuitable to undergo invasive surgery (transurethral resection of the prostate, TURP). However, whether offering these procedures as first-line options represents good value for money (i.e. cost-effectiveness) is an open question. To address this question and inform subsidy decisions in Singapore, we investigated six stepped-up treatment strategies which differ in first- and second-line treatments. For each strategy, we simulated healthcare costs and quality of life for a cohort of moderate and severe BPH patients over their lifetime, considering the possibility of treatment-related adverse effects and multiple rounds of retreatment. The incremental cost of a unit improvement in quality of life for a strategy relative to the next most expensive one was compared against a willingness-to-pay threshold to determine cost-effectiveness. We found that WVTT was cost-effective relative to medication as a first-line treatment for patients with moderate or severe BPH, suggesting it represents good value for money and should be considered for subsidy. PUL was not cost-effective as first- nor second-line treatment. TURP is cost-effective as first-line for severe BPH patients only.

Water vapor thermal therapy: Technical variations among spanish hospitals and efficacy at 2-year follow-up.

AIM: The aim of this work is to evaluate the initial experience with water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in Spanish university hospitals, as well as to describe the differences in technique and follow-up between centers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective observational multicenter study collected baseline characteristics, surgical, postoperative and follow-up data at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, including validated questionnaires, flowmetric variations, complications, and the need for pharmacological or surgical treatment following the procedure. Possible triggers for postoperative acute urinary retention (AUR) were also analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were included. No differences were observed between the groups with and without AUR with respect to catheterization time (5 and 4.3 days respectively, P=.178), or prostate volume (47.9g and 41.4g respectively, P=.147). The mean improvement at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months in terms of peak flow was 5.3, 5.2, 4.2 and 3.8ml/s, respectively. As for ejaculation, an improvement was observed after 3 months of follow-up and was maintained over time. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive treatment for BPH with WVTT shows good functional outcomes at 24 months follow-up, without significant impairment of sexual function and a low incidence of complications. There are minor inter-hospital variations, mainly in the immediate postoperative period.

Six novel minimally invasive therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia. / æ²»ç–—è‰¯æ€§å‰åˆ—è ºå¢žç”Ÿçš„å ­ç§æ–°å¾®åˆ›æ‰‹æœ¯.

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is the most common cause of lower urinary tract symptoms in men. When drug treatment is ineffective or conventional surgery is not suitable, novel minimally invasive therapies can be considered. These include prostatic urethral lift, prostatic artery embolisation, water vapor thermal therapy, Aquablation-image guided robotic waterjet ablation, temporary implantable nitinol device and prostatic stents. These novel therapies can be performed in outpatient setting under local anesthesia, with shorter operative and recovery times, and better protection of ejaculatory function and erectile function. General conditions of the patient and advantages and disadvantages of the each of these therapies should be fully considered to make individualized plans.

Efficacy and safety of Water Vapor Thermal Therapy in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia: a systematic review and single-arm Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common chronic condition among men aged 50 or older, causing voiding and obstructive lower urinary tract symptoms. Water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) using the Rezum® system is a new minimally invasive surgical technique that is increasingly reported as a treatment for BPH. METHODS: The protocol was submitted to the PROSPERO registry. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov up to July 29, 2022. Quality assessment was carried out by a 20-item checklist form prepared by the Institute of Health Economics (IHE). Double arcsine transformation was performed to stabilize the variance of the original ratio. When I2 > 50%, the random effect model was used to calculate the pooled parameters. Otherwise, the fixed effect model was used. 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. A leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of each study on the pooled outcomes, and finally, Egger's test was used to assess publication bias. RESULTS: A total of seven single-arm observational studies and one random controlled trial, including 1015 patients, were included. One year after WVTT, the International Prostate Symptom Score decreased by 11.37 (95% CI: -12.53, -10.21), the IPSS Quality of Life scale decreased by 2.59 (95% CI: -2.92, -2.26), the maximum urine flow rate increased by 5.26 ml/s (95% CI: 4.53, 5.99), and the postvoid residual decreased by 13.18 ml (95% CI: -24.32, -2.03). The most common complication was dysuria, with a pooled incidence of 21% (95% CI: 14%, 29%), and the second most common complication was hematuria, with a pooled incidence of 14% (95% CI: 10%, 18%). The pooled incidence of retreatment was 3% (95% CI: 2%, 5%). CONCLUSIONS: WVTT is an attractive alternative to medication or more invasive surgical procedures and can serve as first-line therapy for men with BPH.

Budget impact analysis of transurethral water vapor therapy for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia in the Spanish national healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: Several surgical treatments are available for managing lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) is a new minimally invasive therapy. This study estimates the budget impact of introducing WVTT for LUTS/BPH into the Spanish health care system. METHODS: A model simulated the evolution of men over 45 years of age with moderate-severe LUTS/BPH after surgical treatment, over a 4-year time horizon, from the Spanish public health care service´s perspective. The technologies in scope included those most used in Spain: WVTT, transurethral resection (TURP), photoselective laser vapourization (PVP) and holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP). Transition probabilities, adverse events and costs were identified from the scientific literature and validated by a panel of experts. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the most uncertain parameters. RESULTS: Per intervention, WVTT resulted in savings of €3,317, €1,933 and €2,661 compared to TURP, PVP and HoLEP. Over a 4-year time horizon, when performed in 10% of the cohort of 109,603 Spanish males with LUTS/BPH, WVTT saved €28,770,125 against the scenario without WVTT availability. CONCLUSIONS: WVTT could reduce the cost of managing LUTS/BPH, increase the quality of health care and reduce the length of procedure and hospital stay.

Patients' Perspectives on Attributes While Choosing Minimally Invasive Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Procedures: Experience from Men Undergoing Water Vapor Thermal Therapy.

Objective: To understand which attributes men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) undergoing water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) find important while considering treatment options for the condition. Methods: Men (n = 170) with lower urinary tract symptoms due to BPH who underwent WVTT between April 2019 and November 2020 in a Toronto urologic clinic were invited to participate in an online survey. The survey included eight attributes of BPH surgical procedures and five attributes of WVTT. Patients were asked how important each attribute was to them before they selected a BPH procedure and decided to undergo WVTT. Results: In total, 128 respondents (75%) completed the survey. A majority of the respondents were White (88%), married (83%), and aged 60-69 years old (45%). Approximately 97% of respondents rated the ability to avoid further BPH treatments as "very important" or "extremely important," followed by duration to return to normal activities (79%), and wait times to receive the procedure (57%). Only 47% of patients reported that postprocedural catheterization was important. For WVTT, 98% of the respondents rated avoiding more invasive surgical treatments and 88% rated a quick recovery as important attributes. Conclusions: Among men with moderate-to-severe BPH undergoing WVTT, the most important attributes for selecting a BPH surgical procedure were avoiding further BPH treatments, returning quickly to normal activities, and reducing treatment wait times. Most men chose WVTT to avoid more invasive procedures and have a quick recovery.

Do Patients Treated with Water Vapor Therapy and Meeting Randomized Clinical Trial Criteria Have Better Urinary and Sexual Outcomes Than an Unselected Cohort?

Introduction: Water vapor intraprostatic injection (Rezum procedure) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most promising minimally invasive surgical treatments. Five-year outcomes from the multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated significant and durable urinary and sexual function results in selected patients. We compared the sexual and urinary outcomes of this procedure in patients satisfying inclusion criteria of the RCT with unselected patients. Materials and Methods: We prospectively followed all patients with symptomatic BPH who underwent Rezum therapy at eight institutions and analyzed the functional results. Patients were divided into two groups: patients who matched the 5-year RCT inclusion criteria (Group A) and patients who did not (Group B). The pre- and postoperative data, complications, presence of antegrade ejaculation, and urinary and sexual outcomes were periodically recorded. Results: A total of 426 patients were eligible for the study (232 in Group A and 194 in Group B). Patients in Group B had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score, prostate volume, and postvoid residual measurement. No difference was found in terms of preoperative International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function, maximum urinary flow, and prostate-specific antigen. Longer operative time and higher number of vapor injections were required in Group B, with no differences in hospital stay, injection density, and complication rates. All the urinary and sexual outcomes improved with no differences between the two groups. The reintervention rate at the latest follow-up visit was 2.6% in Group A and 3.1% in Group B. Conclusions: In our large multicenter series, water vapor intraprostatic injections showed a safe and effective profile regardless of the prostate size, presence of indwelling catheter, antiplatelet/anticoagulant medications, and patients' comorbidities.

Water vapor thermal therapy for indwelling urinary catheter removal in frail patients.

PURPOSE: To report the efficacy and safety of water vapor thermal therapy to achieve catheter removal in frail patients with refractory acute urinary retention. METHODS: Data from consecutive frail patients with indwelling urinary catheter undergoing the Rezum™ therapy (Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, MA) at a single center between October 2017 and June 2021 were prospectively collected. The included patients were deemed unfit or at high risk of complications for conventional benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) surgery. Prostate volumes up to 120 mL were considered eligible. The primary endpoint was successful cessation of catheter dependency, assessed postoperatively and up to 1 year of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 24 men met our inclusion criteria. The median age, Charlson comorbidity index, and duration of preoperative catheterization were 77 years (IQR 67-86), 6 (IQR 3-7), and 113 days (IQR 87-159), respectively. Two cases (8.3%) of postoperative complications were recorded (Clavien II and Clavien IIIa). After a median postoperative catheterization time of 21 days (IQR 11-32), all patients regained spontaneous voiding. During follow-up, two patients died and a total of 22 patients completed the 1 year follow-up. All patients maintained spontaneous voiding without recurrence of urinary retention. No surgical retreatment was performed. In terms of pharmacological management, 22/24 patients (91.7%) had a BPH medication pre-Rezum™; this decreased to 8/22 patients (36.3%) post-Rezum™ (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-institution, prospective, and observational study, water vapor thermal therapy was found to be effective and safe in restoring successful spontaneous voiding in a cohort of elderly and frail patients.

Safety and efficacy of Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy system in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia / 中华泌尿外科杂志

Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Rezūm Water Vapor Thermal Therapy system in the treatment of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).Methods:The clinical data of 22 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia treated with Rezūm Water Vapor Thermal Therapy system in Boao Yiling Life Care Center in Hainan from December 2020 to January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, with age of (61.0±5.9) years, prostate volume of (43.7±8.4) ml. international prostate symptom score (IPSS) of (19.3±3.7), quality of life (QOL) score of (4.2±0.8), maximum urinary flow rate (Q max) of (11.9±3.4) ml ml/s, and residual urine volume (PVR) of (14.0±19.0). For 19 patients with sexual life, the International Index of Erectile Function Questionnaire-5 (IIEF-5) were 17.0±5.5, the Men's Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction Score (MSHQ-EjD) ejaculatory function score were 10.0±3.2, and the ejaculatory satisfaction score were 1.5±1.0. Twenty-two patients underwent Rezūm Water Vapor Thermal Therapy under intravenous anesthesia (general anesthesia without intubation) in the dorsal lithotomy position. The Rezūm system consisted of reusable thermal steam treatment device and disposable prostate thermal steam treatment instrument. The thermal steam treatment device used radiofrequency energy to heat sterile distilled water, generating high-temperature steam at 103℃. In a 9-second timeframe, the tissue temperature within each treatment area was raised approximately 70℃, causing cell death and resulting in a shrink in prostate tissue volume. The disposable prostate thermal steam treatment instrument could be inserted through a cystoscope and had a retractable needle tip that extends to a length of 10.25 mm. The needle tip had 12 evenly distributed holes arranged in three rows of four holes each, with a spacing of 120° between rows, allowing for even diffusion of thermal steam along the circumference. The patient was placed in a lithotomy position, and the disposable prostate thermal steam treatment instrument was used to examine the prostate, urethra, and bladder via cystoscopy, assessing the lateral lobes and median lobe of the prostate. The tissue spacing within each field of view of the treatment instrument is 0.5 cm, and the distance from the bladder neck to the verumontanum is calculated. The first needle was injected at 3 o’clock along the left lobe, withdrawing 2 fields of view each time. During the release of thermal steam, the needle tip was positioned perpendicular to the prostate urethral mucosa, and each needle injection delivered 0.42 ml of sterile distilled water-formed thermal steam into the prostate tissue. The thermal steam injection lasted for 9 seconds, followed by a 2-3 seconds waiting period before retracting the needle tip. One needle was injected per 2 fields of view, progressing towards the proximal urethra of the verumontanum. The same method was used to treat the right lobe. For cases with significant median lobe enlargement, two fields of view were retracted at the bladder neck, and the needle was inserted at a 45° angle. The second needle was injected at intervals determined by the extent of median lobe enlargement. Each puncture point was observed for no significant bleeding, and the instrument was then removed, with an F16/F18 silicone catheter left in place. The operative time as well as indwelling catheter time were recorded. The clinical parameters such as IPSS, QOL, prostate volume, Qmax, PVR, QOL, IIEF-5 and MSHQ-EjD at preoperative and 12 to 22 weeks post operation were compared. Adverse events from the Rezūm procedure to 12-22 weeks postoperatively were recorded. Results:All the operations were successfully completed. The operation time of Rezūm system was 3.9±1.6 min, and the indwelling catheter time after operation was 4.8±1.1 days. The IPSS scores of 22 patients at 12-22 weeks after operation were 4.4±3.3, whose reduction was 14.9±4.4 compared with these at baseline( P<0.01). The PV was (37.7±8.4)ml, Qmax was (25.5±9.6)ml/s, PVR was (6.2±8.1)ml, and QOL was 1.6±0.9, all demonstrating statistically significant differences compared to preoperative values ( P<0.05). Among the 19 cases with sexual activity, the IIEF-5 score was 20.4±3.2, and the ejaculatory function score of MSHQ-EjD was 13.1±3.1, both showing statistically significant differences compared to preoperative scores ( P<0.05). The ejaculatory satisfaction score of MSHQ-EjD was 1.1±0.5, and there was no statistically significant difference compared to preoperative scores ( P>0.05). None of the 22 cases required medication or further surgical treatment for BPH after surgery. There were no urethral injuries, rectal or bladder perforations during the surgeries, and no severe complications such as rectal fistula or bladder neck contracture occurred postoperatively. There were no deaths reported. Postoperative discomfort in the urethra occurred in 19 cases, urethral pain in 8 cases, hematuria in 15 cases, poor sleep quality in 2 cases, and constipation in 1 case, all of which resolved within 7 to 10 days after surgery. Erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation occurred in one case each at 4 to 5 weeks postoperatively but did not reoccur thereafter. Prostatitis and nodular hyperplasia of the middle lobe of the prostate occurred in one case each at 21 weeks and 25 weeks postoperatively, respectively, and no treatment was administered. Conclusions:In the real world, the short-term overall effect of Rezūm Water Vapor Thermal Therapy system in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia is satisfactory, which shows good efficacy and safety.

Six novel minimally invasive therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia / 浙江大学学报·医学版

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is the most common cause of lower urinary tract symptoms in men. When drug treatment is ineffective or conventional surgery is not suitable, novel minimally invasive therapies can be considered. These include prostatic urethral lift, prostatic artery embolisation, water vapor thermal therapy, Aquablation-image guided robotic waterjet ablation, temporary implantable nitinol device and prostatic stents. These novel therapies can be performed in outpatient setting under local anesthesia, with shorter operative and recovery times, and better protection of ejaculatory function and erectile function. General conditions of the patient and advantages and disadvantages of the each of these therapies should be fully considered to make individualized plans.

Water Vapor Thermal Therapy: Minimally Invasive Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.

Water vapor thermal therapy is a minimally invasive treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) that uses steam to ablate prostatic tissue to relieve lower urinary tract symptoms associated with BPH. It is an option for 30 to 80 g prostates in well-selected patients, and may avoid sexual side effects seen in other more invasive BPH treatments. It is a simple procedure with a short learning curve that can be performed in-office under local and oral anesthesia. Water vapor therapy should be offered to ideal candidates along with information regarding its risks, benefits, and outcomes.

Medium-Term Real-World Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Surgical Therapies for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Water Vapor Thermal Therapy (Rezum) vs Prostatic Urethral Lift (UroLift) in a High-Volume Urban Academic Center.

Purpose: Water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT, i.e., Rezum®) and prostatic urethral lift (PUL, i.e., Urolift®) are minimally invasive surgical therapy (MIST) options for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Few studies have directly compared the two procedures. We examined the clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing WVTT and PUL at our high-volume urban academic center. Methods: We reviewed our institutional MIST database to identify patients with prostate sizes ≥30 and ≤80 cc who underwent WVTT or PUL for treatment of BPH between January 2017 and September 2021. Pre- and postoperative outcomes, including retreatment rates, American Urological Association symptom score (AUA-SS), maximum flow (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR), medication usage, trial of void success rates, catheterization requirements, and postoperative complications within 90 days were extracted and compared between procedures. Results: Three hundred seven patients received WVTT and 110 patients received PUL with average follow-up times of 11.3 and 12.8 months, respectively. WVTT patients showed significant improvements in AUA-SS, Qmax, and PVR, whereas PUL patients showed improvements in only AUA-SS and Qmax. Both WVTT and PUL patients with longitudinal follow-up demonstrated improvements in AUA-SS, Qmax, and PVR. Postoperatively, alpha-blocker utilization was significantly decreased following both WVTT and PUL (WVTT: 73.9%-46.6%, PUL: 76.4%-38.2%, both p < 0.001). Compared to patients receiving PUL, WVTT patients more frequently reported postoperative dysuria (22.8% vs 8.3%, p = 0.001) and nonclot-related retention (18.9% vs 7.3%, p = 0.005); PUL patients more frequently experienced postoperative clot retention (7.3% vs 2.6%, p = 0.027). There were no differences in rates of postoperative bladder spasm, trial of void success, urinary tract infections, or emergency department visits. Postoperative erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation were rare and occurred at similar rates. Conclusion: In the real-world setting, WVTT and PUL have similar medium-term efficacy in improving symptoms and decreasing medication utilization for patients with BPH. Differences in postoperative complication profiles should inform patient counseling.

Minimally Invasive Therapies for Benign Prostatic Obstruction: A Review of Currently Available Techniques Including Prostatic Artery Embolization, Water Vapor Thermal Therapy, Prostatic Urethral Lift, Temporary Implantable Nitinol Device and Aquablation.

A 66-years old male patient presents with lower urinary tract symptoms, mostly due to obstructive symptoms, and an enlarged prostate with 80 cm3, with a broad-based median lobe, suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) was proposed. However, the patient desired to preserve ejaculatory function and was afraid of a potential negative impact on erectile function. Thus, the patient inquired about minimally invasive therapies (MITs) as alternatives to TURP. In this review, currently available MITs for BPO are described including prostatic artery embolization, water vapor thermal therapy (Rezum®), prostatic urethral lift, iTIND® (temporary implantable device) and aquablation (Aquabeam®). Focus is given on the description of the technique, level of evidence and advantages over conventional surgical options.

New Endoscopic In-office Surgical Therapies for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: In recent years, new technologies have been developed to treat benign prostatic enlargement (BPE). Three of these devices may be utilized in office and are promising additions. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review all clinical trials investigating prostatic urethral lift (PUL), water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT), and temporary implantable nitinol device (TIND), with emphasis on clinical efficacy and complications. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a systematic review of PubMed/Medline database in November 2020 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of 168 articles identified, 18 met the inclusion criteria. Evidence consisted of few randomized controlled trials, and multiple single-arm prospective and retrospective studies. Among the three modalities, PUL demonstrates rare occurrence of serious complications but higher retreatment rates at short- and long-term follow-up. WVTT offers lower retreatment rates with a similar safety profile. TIND studies report varying rates of retreatment and complications. All technologies offer low rates of erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction, although the risk appears to be highest for WVTT (<10.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Among the emerging technologies introduced to treat BPE, the in-office PUL, WVTT, and TIND systems are valuable additions to the current surgical options. These systems offer unique advantages that should be considered in the shared decision-making process. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we identified all clinical trials reporting on the efficacy and safety of the in-office prostatic urethral lift (PUL), water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT), and temporary implantable nitinol device (TIND) systems for the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement. We found that PUL and WVTT demonstrate acceptable outcomes in terms of functional improvement, retreatment, and complications. More data with longer follow-up are required to further evaluate TIND, but early results are promising.

Comparison of water vapor thermal therapy and prostate artery embolization for fragile patients with indwelling urinary catheters: Preliminary results from a multi-institutional study.

PURPOSE: To report our preliminary experience with water vapor thermal therapy with the Rezum™ System and Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE) for treatment of medically refractory, complete urinary retention to achieve successful cessation of catheter dependency in frail-patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multi-institutional study was conducted including all patients who underwent Rezum™ procedure and PAE between October 2017 and June 2020. The included population focused on frail-patients unsuitable for conventional surgery with complete urinary retention. Rezum™ patients were identified and matched (1:1) with patients who underwent PAE. The matching criteria were age, Charlson score, prostate volume and duration of follow-up. The primary outcome was catheter-free survival, defined as spontaneous voiding and release from catheter dependence. RESULTS: Eleven patients from the Rezum™ group were matched to 11 embolized patients. PAE and Rezum™ patients were comparable in age (median: 77 vs. 75 years), Charlson score (median: 6 vs. 6) and prostate volume (74 vs. 60 cc). Procedures were significantly longer in the PAE group compared to the Rezum™ procedures (median: 148 vs. 8min, P<0.001). After a median follow-up of 12 months, spontaneous voiding was conserved in all cases (100%) after the Rezum™ procedure and in 5 cases (45.4%) after PAE (P=0.01). In catheter-free patients, the rate of benign prostatic hyperplasia medication use after procedure was 40% for PAE and 18.2% for Rezum™ patients (P=0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary experience for treatment of complete urinary retention in frail-patients shows the feasibility of PAE and Rezum™ to restore spontaneous urination without being associated with the occurrence of major complications. Early data suggests that Rezum™ may provide superior results in terms of cessation of catheter dependence. Future studies are needed to definitively assess which treatment would be best suited for each patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.