A double‐blind randomized controlled trial and economic evaluation of transurethral resection vs contact laser vaporization for benign prostatic enlargement: a 3‐year follow‐up

• Published in: BJU international 2000-01, Vol.85 (1), p.74-78
• Main Authors: Keoghane, S.R., Lawrence, K.C., Gray, A.M., Doll, H.A., Hancock, A.M., Turner, K., Sullivan, M.E., Dyar, O., Cranston, D.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Biological and medical sciences; Contact laser prostatectomy; Costs and Cost Analysis; Double-Blind Method; economics; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Laser Therapy - economics; Laser Therapy - methods; Male; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Prostatic Hyperplasia - economics; Prostatic Hyperplasia - surgery; randomized controlled trial; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases; Surgery of the urinary system; transurethral resection; Transurethral Resection of Prostate - economics; Transurethral Resection of Prostate - methods; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1464-4096; 1464-410X
• DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2000.00407.x

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of contact laser prostate surgery in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Patients and methodsA prospective double‐blind ran‐domized controlled trial of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and contact laser prostatectomy was conducted, with an economic evaluation of both procedures. The primary outcome measure was the change in the American Urologic Association symptom score, with secondary outcome measures being the peak urinary flow rate, treatment‐related complications, re‐operation rate and health service costs. ResultsThe perioperative blood loss and transfusion requirements were statistically significantly lower for laser prostatectomy than for TURP. There was no clinically significant difference between TURP and contact laser prostatectomy in the mean change in symptom scores and flow rates. There were distinct perioperative advantages in favour of the contact laser treatment, but some disadvantages in terms of re‐catheterization and re‐operation rates. ConclusionsContact laser prostatectomy is a valid treatment for benign prostatic hypertrophy. The performance of contact laser prostatectomy as day‐case surgery would have cost advantages to the National Health Service.