[Multidisciplinary approach in urology. Laser technologies: faster, simpler, more efficient].

Laser technology has taken a place among the methods of treatment of various urological diseases. The new laser devices are being developed in addition to commonly used. Physicists of the russian NTO "IRE Polus" in collaboration with doctors from Sechenov University have developed a new generation laser device - thulium fiber laser. It has been actively used since 2017 for laser enucleation of prostate. Later the laser was used for treatment of bladder tumor, lithotripsy. The device has already managed to prove its efficacy in in-vitro experiments and clinical practice surpassing foreign analogues.

[Laser in laparoscopic urology].

Nowadays, various laparoscopic instruments for tissue dissection and vessel coagulation are available. However, there are ongoing studies dedicated to "ideal" type of energy suitable for this aim. Laser radiation has been used for many years in medical practice and it is established as reliable and effective method in surgical armamentarium. The ability to provide highly precision and well-controlled action on the tissues, improved hemostasis, easy adaptability to fiber-optic and minimally invasive delivery systems, as well as the possibility of facilitating complex dissection made lasers an important tool for surgeons. The mechanism and methods of laser energy using in urology have been studied since 1980s, but there is still no consensus on the optimal type of laser and its settings during urological surgeries, which determines the importance of further researches dedicated to this promising form of energy.

[Comparative analysis of the effectiveness of various techniques of endoscopic prostate enucleation in a single center]. / Sravnitel'nyi analiz éffektivnosti razlichnykh metodik éndoskopicheskoi énukleatsii prostaty.

AIM: To compare electro- and laser enucleation (thulium, holmium) of prostate hyperplasia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 693 prostate hyperplasia patients were enrolled. 489 patients underwent holmium enucleation (HoLEP), 51 - monopolar enucleation, 153 - thulium enucleation (ThuLEP). Prostate volume was 91.7 (50-250) cm3. There were no significant differences in preoperative variables between both groups (I-PSS, QoL, Qmax, residual urine volume) (p>0.05). RESULTS: Mean time of HoLEP was 97.0±42.2 min, monopolar enucleation - 112.9±36.3 min, ThuLEP duration was significantly less (77.4±36.3 min, p<0.01). An efficacy of all methods was confirmed in 6 months after surgery by significant (p<0.01) improvement of functional parameters (I-PSS, QoL, Qmax, residual urine volume). CONCLUSION: High efficiency of thulium and holmium enucleation allows to consider them as 'gold standard' of prostate hyperplasia management. Despite higher incidence of complications an efficacy of monopolar enucleation is comparable to that in laser techniques.