Microwave thermotherapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia

• Published in: Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2012-09 (9), p.CD004135-CD004135
• Main Authors: Hoffman, Richard M, Monga, Manoj, Elliott, Sean P, Macdonald, Roderick, Langsjoen, Jens, Tacklind, James, Wilt, Timothy J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists - therapeutic use; Aged; Humans; Hyperthermia, Induced - methods; Male; Microwaves - adverse effects; Microwaves - therapeutic use; Prostatic Hyperplasia - therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Transurethral Resection of Prostate - adverse effects
• ISSN: 1469-493X
• DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004135.pub3

Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) has been the gold-standard treatment for alleviating urinary symptoms and improving urinary flow in men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, the morbidity of TURP approaches 20%, and less invasive techniques have been developed for treating BPH. Preliminary data suggest that microwave thermotherapy, which delivers microwave energy to produce coagulation necrosis in prostatic tissue, is a safe, effective treatment for BPH. To assess the therapeutic efficacy and safety of microwave thermotherapy techniques for treating men with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction. Randomized controlled trials were identified from The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, bibliographies of retrieved articles, reviews, technical reports, and by contacting relevant expert trialists and microwave manufacturers. All randomized controlled trials evaluating transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) for men with symptomatic BPH were eligible for this review. Comparison groups could include transurethral resection of the prostate, minimally invasive prostatectomy techniques, sham thermotherapy procedures, and medications. Outcome measures included urinary symptoms, urinary function, prostate volume, mortality, morbidity, and retreatment. Two review authors independently identified potentially relevant abstracts and then assessed the full papers for inclusion. Two review authors independently abstracted study design, baseline characteristics, and outcomes data and assessed methodological quality using a standard form. We attempted to obtain missing data from authors or sponsors, or both. In this update, we identified no new randomized comparisons of TUMT that provided evaluable effectiveness data. Fifteen studies involving 1585 patients met the inclusion criteria, including six comparisons of microwave thermotherapy with TURP, eight comparisons with sham thermotherapy procedures, and one comparison with an alpha-blocker. Study durations ranged from 3 to 60 months. The mean age of participants was 66.8 years and the baseline symptom scores and urinary flow rates, which did not differ across treatment groups, demonstrated moderately severe lower urinary tract symptoms. The pooled mean urinary symptom scores decreased by 65% with TUMT and by 77% with TURP. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was -1.00 (95% CI -2.03 to -0.03), fa