Open Access

ARTICLE

Early patient experience following treatment with the UroLift prostatic urethral lift and Rezum steam injection

Ronald F. Tutrone¹, William Schiff²

1 Chesapeake Urology Research Associates, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
2 Urology Associates of Central California, Fresno, California, USA
Address correspondence to Dr. Ronald F. Tutrone, Chesapeake Urology Research Associates, 6535 N. Charles Street, Suite 625, Baltimore, MD 21204 USA

Canadian Journal of Urology 2020, 27(3), 10213-10219.

Abstract

Introduction: To report the early postoperative patient experience, including symptom response, catheterization, recovery and satisfaction, following treatment with two minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): mechanical disobstruction with UroLift prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and tissue ablation with steam injection (Rezum).
Materials and methods: Patient reported outcomes of 53 non-retention patients from two U.S. sites who underwent PUL (n = 30) or Rezum (n = 23) were collected within 2 months post-treatment. There were no exclusion criteria for baseline symptoms, prostate size, or BPH medical therapy. Patients completed questionnaires which assessed postoperative BPH symptoms and characteristics. Outcomes were compared between treatment arms with unpaired t-tests and Fisher’s exact tests.
Results: PUL and Rezum patients were similar in age and prostate volume; patients completed the questionnaire an average of 30 ± 11 days post-treatment. Absolute mean International Prostate Symptom Score and quality of life was significantly better for PUL patients. Seven percent of PUL patients were catheterized by postoperative day 3 compared to 55% of Rezum patients (p = 0.0003). PUL patients experienced a rate of 83% treatment satisfaction (versus 65% for Rezum, p = 0.2) and less interference with daily activities (sports interference, p = 0.007; entertainment interference, p = 0.01; community interference, p = 0.04). Both groups reported BPH medication use following treatment (37% PUL versus 91% Rezum), albeit significantly higher for Rezum (p < 0.0001).
Conclusion: Preliminary data suggests UroLift PUL provides a superior patient experience with better sexual function, lower catheterization rates, less daily interference, and higher patient satisfaction in the recovery period compared to Rezum.

---

Keywords

---