Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate vs Plasmakinetic Resection of the Prostate: A Randomized Prospective Trial With 12-Month Follow-up in Mainland China

ObjectiveTo compare the short-term efficacy and safety results of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) and plasmakinetic resection of prostate (PKRP), 2 methods of treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)–related lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in mainland China.MethodsOne hundred twenty patients with LUTS secondary to BPH were randomly divided into 2 groups: PVP group (n = 61) and PKRP group (n = 59). Perioperative data and postoperative complications were recorded for both groups. Patients were followed up for 12 months after treatment.ResultsCompared with PKRP, PVP required a longer operation time (56 vs 41 minutes; P <.01). PVP also needed shorter catheterization time (2.4 vs 3.5 days; P <.01) and shorter length of hospitalization (3.5 vs 5.1 days; P <.01). International Prostate Symptom Score, Qmax, and quality of life score were significantly improved for both groups after surgery, and no significant differences were apparent between the 2 groups, for up to 12 months. Short-term complications were assessed in regard to necessity of blood transfusion (1 vs 1), clot retention (1 vs 0), reoperation (1 vs 0), incontinence (0 vs 0), urethral stricture (1 vs 0), and retrograde ejaculation (4 vs 6) in the PVP vs PKRP groups, respectively.ConclusionIn patients with BPH-related LUTS, PVP may be a superior treatment to PKRP as it relates to the endpoints of this study, with short-term results after a 12-month follow-up as length of hospital stay and catheterization time needed were both less than what was required for PKRP. Long-term comparative data are required to clearly define the role of PVP and PKRP in patients.