Thulium Laser Vaporization versus Vapoenucleation (without morcellation) Technique for BPH: Do We Have a Winner?

Main Article Content

Debanga Sarma
Yashasvi Singh
Saumar Jyoti Baruah
Rajeev T.P.
Sasanka Kumar Barua
Puskal Kumar Bagchi
Mandeep Phukan
Manash Pratim Kashyap


Thulium, Vapoenucleation, Vaporization, IPSS, Laser


Background and Objective
The thulium laser surgery is a relatively new approach in which a wavelength of approximately 2 μm is emitted in continuous-wave mode, thus enabling the precise incision of tissue by using a wavelength that matches the water absorption peak of 1.92 μm in tissue. However, no published multinational study or other evidence definitively declares the superiority of thulium vaporization (ThuVAP) over thulium vapoenucle-ation (ThuVEP) without morcellator for better management of bothersome benign prostatic hyperplasia. The present study aims to evaluate the efficacy of vaporization and vapoenucleation (without a morcellator) in thulium laser prostatectomy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.
A retrospective analysis of 82 patients who underwent thulium laser prostatectomy between February 2017 and January 2018 with ThuVAP and ThuVEP techniques was done and outcome measures analyzed were International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality-of-life score (QoL), maximum flow rate (Q max), post-void residual (PVRU), total operating time, laser time and resected tissue weight.
No significant differences were noted between ThuVAP and ThuVEP in terms of post-operative prostate volume (22.4 vs. 21.7 mL) and post-operative prostate specific antigen (PSA) (2.54 vs. 1.85 ng/mL). Nonetheless, there were differences between the groups in total lasing time (56.5 vs. 44.8 min, p = 0.001) and total operative time (88.5 vs. 71.5 min, p= 0.001). There was also a significant difference in IPSS, QoL score, Q max, and PVRU at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 9 months after surgery.

Abstract 37 | pdf Downloads 95


1. Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R. Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)–incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol 2006;50:969–79.
2. Mebust W, Holtgrewe H, Cockett A, Peters P. Transurethral prostatectomy: immediate and postoperative complications. A cooperative study of 13 participating institutions evaluating 3,885 patients. J Urol 1989;141:243–47.
3. Yu X, Elliott S, Wilt T, Mcbean A. Practice patterns in benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical therapy: the dramatic increase in minimally invasive technologies. J Urol 2008;180:241–45.
4. Xia S, Zhuo J, Sun X, Han B, Shao Y, Zhang Y. Thulium laser versus standard transurethral resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective trial. Eur Urol 2008;53:383–90.
5. Szlauer R GRRAPLSN.. Endoscopic vaporesection of the prostate using the continuous-wave 2-microm thulium laser: outcome and demonstration of the surgical technique. Eur Urol 2009;55:368–75.
6. Fried N., Murray K. High-power thulium fiber laser ablation of urinary tissues at 1.94 microm. J Endourol 2005;19:25–31.

7. Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A, et al. Morbidity mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol 2008;180:246–49.
8. Hardy L, Wilson C, Irby P, Fried N. Thulium fiber laser lithotripsy in an in vitro ureter model. J Biomed Opt 2014;19:128001.
9. Bach T, Wendt-Nordahl G, Michel MS, Herrmann TR, Gross AJ. Feasibility and efficacy of Thulium:YAG laser enucleation (VapoEnucleation) of the prostate. World J Urol 2009;27:541–5.
10. Shah HN, Sodha HS, Kharodawala SJ, Khandkar AA, Hegde SS, Bansal MB. Influence of prostate size on the outcome of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. BJU Int 2008;101:1536–41.
11. Bouchier-Hayes DM, Van Appledorn S, Bugeja P. A randomized trial of photoselective vaporization of the prostate using the 80-W potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser vs transurethral prostatectomy, with a 1-year follow-up. BJU Int 2009;105:964–69.
12. Lukacs B, Loeffler J, Bruye`re F. Photoselective vaporization porization of the prostate with GreenLight 120-W laser compared with monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: A multicencer randomized controlled trial. EurUrol 2012;61:1165–73.
13. Herrmann TW, Liatsikos E, Nagele U. EAU guidelines lines on laser technologies. Eur Urol 2012;61:783–95.
14. Bach T, Netsch C, Pohlmann L, Herrmann TR, Gross AJ. Thulium:YAG vapoenucleation in large volume prostates. J Urol 2011;186:2323–7.
15. Gross A, Netsch C, Knipper S., et al. Complications and early postoperative outcome in 1080 patients after thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate: results at a single institution. Eur Urol 2012;63:859–67.
16. Vazirian-Zadeh M, Anderson J, Gill R, et al. Thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (thulep) as a technique for treatment of BPH: Evaluation of a six-year experience at a single institution. J Endolum Endourol 2018 Oct;1(2):10–14.
17. Netsch C, Bach T, Herrmann T, et al. Evaluation of the learning curve for Thulium VapoEnucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) using a mentor-based approach. World J Urol 2013;31:1231–38.
18. Pariser J, Famakinwa O, Pearce S, Chung D. High-power thulium laser vaporization of the prostate: short-term outcomes of safety and effectiveness. J Endourol 2014 Oct;28(8):1357–62.
19. Vargas C, Garcia-Larrosa A, Capdevila S,Laborda A. Vaporization of the prostate with 150-W thulium laser: complications with 6-month follow-up. J Endourol 2014;28:841–45.
20. Shah HN, Mahajan AP, Hegde SS, Bansal MB. Peri-operative complications of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: experience in the first 280 patients, and a review of literature. BJU Int 2007;100:94–101.
21. Bachmann A, Muir GH, Collins EJ. 180-W XPS GreenLight laser therapy for benign prostate hyperplasia: early safety, efficacy, and perioperative outcome after 201 procedures. Eur Urol 2012;61:600–7.
22. Ruszat R, Wyler SF, Seitz M. Comparison of potassium-titanylphosphate laser vaporization of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate: update of a prospective non-randomized two-centre study. BJU Int 2008;102:1432–8.
23. Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Seitz M, SchlenkerB, Hermanek P. Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patient. J Urol 2008;180:246–49.
24. Coyne KS, Kaplan SA, Chapple CR. Risk factors and comorbid conditions associated with lower urinary tract symptoms: EpiLUTS. BJU Int 2009;103(3):24–32.
25. Neal DE, Ramsden PD, Sharples L. Outcome of elective prostatectomy. BMJ 1989;299:762–67.

26. Montorsi F, Naspro R, Salonia A. Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate: results from a 2-center prospective randomized trial in patients with obstructive benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 2004;172:1926–9.
27. Ahyai SA, Gilling P, Kaplan SA. et al. Meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic enlargement. Eur Urol 2010;58:384–97.
28. Zhang F, Shao Q, Herrmann TR, Tian Y, Zhang Y. Thulium laser versus holmium laser transurethral enucleation of the prostate: 18-month follow-up data of a single center. Urology 2012;79:869–74.
29. Parsons J, Bergstrom J, Silberstein J, Barrett Connor E. Prevalence and characteristics of lower urinary tract symptoms in men aged > or = 80 years. Urology 2008;72:318–21.