Contemporary outcomes after transurethral procedures for bladder neck contracture following endoscopic treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia

• Verfasst von: Rosenbaum, Clemens Mathias [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Vetterlein, Malte Wolfram [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Fisch, Margit [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Reiss, Philipp [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Worst, Thomas [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Kranz, Jennifer [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Steffens, Joachim [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Kluth, Luis [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Pfalzgraf, Daniel Philipp [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Contemporary outcomes after transurethral procedures for bladder neck contracture following endoscopic treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia
• Verf.angabe: Clemens M. Rosenbaum, Malte W. Vetterlein, Margit Fisch, Philipp Reiss, Thomas Stefan Worst, Jennifer Kranz, Joachim Steffens, Luis A. Kluth, Daniel Pfalzgraf
• E-Jahr: 2021
• Jahr: 29 June 2021
• Umfang: 7 S.
• Fussnoten: Published: 29 June 2021 ; Gesehen am 31.05.2022
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Journal of Clinical Medicine
• Ort Quelle: Basel : MDPI, 2012
• Jahr Quelle: 2021
• Band/Heft Quelle: 10(2021), 13, Artikel-ID 2884, Seite 1-7
• ISSN Quelle: 2077-0383
• DOI: doi:10.3390/jcm10132884
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• Sach-SW: bladder neck stenosis
• Sach-SW: BPH
• Sach-SW: endourology
• Sach-SW: HoLEP
• Sach-SW: TURP
• K10plus-PPN: 1805359029

Abstract

Objectives: Bladder neck contracture (BNC) is a bothersome complication following endoscopic treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The objective of our study was to give a more realistic insight into contemporary endoscopic BNC treatment and to evaluate and identify risk factors associated with inferior outcome. Material and Methods: We identified patients who underwent transurethral treatment for BNC secondary to previous endoscopic therapy for BPH between March 2009 and October 2016. Patients with vesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy were excluded. Digital charts were reviewed for re-admissions and re-visits at our institutions and patients were contacted personally for follow-up. Our non-validated questionnaire assessed previous urologic therapies (including radiotherapy, endoscopic, and open surgery), time to eventual further therapy in case of BNC recurrence, and the modality of recurrence management. Results: Of 60 patients, 49 (82%) and 11 (18%) underwent transurethral bladder neck resection and incision, respectively. Initial BPH therapy was transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in 54 (90%) and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in six (10%) patients. Median time from prior therapy was 8.5 (IQR 5.3-14) months and differed significantly in those with (6.5 months; IQR 4-10) and those without BNC recurrence (10 months; IQR 6-20; p = 0.046). Thirty-three patients (55%) underwent initial endoscopic treatment, and 27 (45%) repeated endoscopic treatment for BNC. In initially-treated patients, time since BPH surgery differed significantly between those with a recurrence (median 7.5 months; IQR 6-9) compared to those treated successfully (median 12 months; IQR 9-25; p = 0.01). In patients with repeated treatment, median time from prior BNC therapy did not differ between those with (4.5 months; IQR 2-12) and those without a recurrence (6 months; IQR 6-10; p = 0.6). Overall, BNC treatment was successful in 32 patients (53%). The observed success rate of BNC treatment was significantly higher after HoLEP compared to TURP (100% vs. 48%; p = 0.026). Type of BNC treatment, number of BNC treatment, and age at surgery did not influence the outcome. Conclusions: A longer time interval between previous BPH therapy and subsequent BNC incidence seems to favorably affect treatment success of endoscopic BNC treatment, and transurethral resection and incision appear equally effective. Granted the relatively small sample size, BNC treatment success seems to be higher after HoLEP compared to TURP, which warrants validation in larger cohorts.