Urology Annals
About UA | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Online submissionLogin 
Urology Annals
  Editorial Board | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact
Users Online: 2562   Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 36-40

Prostate laser vaporization is safe and effective in elderly men


1 University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, USA
2 University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla; Department of Urology, UC San Diego Health System, San Diego, USA
3 Urologic Cancer, UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, USA
4 University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla; Department of Urology, UC San Diego Health System, San Diego; Urologic Cancer, UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla; Section of Urology, VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, CA, USA

Correspondence Address:
J Kellogg Parsons
Department of Urology, UC San Diego Health System, 3855 Health Sciences Drive #0987, La Jolla, CA 92093 0987
USA
Login to access the Email id


DOI: 10.4103/0974-7796.148595

PMID: 25657541

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: There are few data on the safety and efficacy of laser photoselective vaporization (LVP) in elderly men. We compared the safety and efficacy of LVP for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in men ≥75 years, who we defined as elderly, to those <75 years. Materials and Methods: Safety and efficacy outcomes in elderly men undergoing LVP for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to BPH from 2005 to 2012 were compared with men <75 years. Differences between-groups in demographics, perioperative outcomes, complications, and postoperative changes in International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS) were calculated. Results: Of 202 patients, 49 (24%) were elderly (range: 75-95 years) and 153 (76%) were <75 years. Preoperatively, elderly men were more likely to have heart disease (35% vs. 20%, P = 0.03), gross hematuria (6.1% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.05), urinary retention (57% vs. 41%, P = 0.07), and take anti-coagulants (61% vs. 35%, P = 0.002). Elderly men had a longer median length of stay (1 day vs. 0 day, P = 0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in transfusion frequency (4.4% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.14) or Clavien III complications (2% vs. 2.6%, P = 1.0). One month postsurgery, elderly patients reported smaller median decreases in I-PSS (5.5 vs. 9, P = 0.02) and urinary bother (1 point vs. 2, P = 0.03) compared with preoperative values. At till 9 months follow-up, there were no significant between-group differences in median I-PSS or urinary bother scores. Conclusions: Despite a higher prevalence of preoperative comorbidity and urinary retention, elderly LVP patients experienced perioperative safety and shorter term efficacy outcomes comparable to younger men.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1943    
    Printed57    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded241    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal