Comparing the clinical efficacy of prostate enucleation by the Millin method and enucleation performed using a holmium laser (HoLEP) with a prostate volume more than 80 cm³

Purpose of the study was to compare of the average long-term results of classical prostate enucleation using the Millin method and enucleation performed using a holmium laser (HoLEP).

Patients and methods. This study, conducted on the basis of the Endocrinology Research Center of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, included 100 patients operated on for obstruction of the prostatic part of the urethra over the period 2020–2023. The main indication for surgery was benign prostatic hyperplasia. The selection criterion for patients was a prostate volume of more than 80 cm³. The patients were divided into 2 groups depending on the intervention performed: in the 1^st group Millin surgery was performed (n = 50), in group 2ⁿ laser enucleation of the prostate was done (n = 50). The data obtained during the operation in the early postoperative period, as well as the results of postoperative follow-up of patients were analyzed.

Results. In the mid-term period, 4–6 months after surgery, patients from both groups were observed to improve their condition and reduce complaints of dysuric phenomena. The results were obtained illustrating a shorter inpatient stay for patients who underwent HoLEP (4.3 ± 0.6 days versus 10.0 ± 2.4 during Millin surgery), which is correspondingly associated with a faster recovery after this intervention compared with the classic one. A statistically significant (p-value < 0.05) problem of patients from the HoLEP group was urethral stricture, which occurred in 6 % of the subjects from this group and did not occur in the Millin surgery group. In fact, scarring of the bladder neck was more commonly obserbed (10 % vs. 8 %) in the Millin surgery group. However, these complications were not more than 10 %. As a result of the study, there was no statistically significant effect of using HoLEP on erectile dysfunction in patients, which suggests the potential of this technique for a lower incidence of worsening erectile dysfunction compared with open intervention.

Conclusions. HoLEP is a safe method of prostate enucleation, applicable for its large volume, in particular, up to 80 cm³. This procedure is an alternative to classical open surgery, and can be recommended for patients with polymorbidity to reduce the risk of perioperative complications and reduce rehabilitation time. Millin surgery is also a reliable treatment method with high sensitivity to the detection of cellular atypia and a large volume of cytoreduction. The decision on the surgical procedure used must be made individually for each patient.

1. Glybochko PV, Aliayev YuG, Lokshin KL, Dymov AM. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in BPH treatment. Bashkortostan Medical Journal. 2011;6(2):221–224. (In Russ.).

2. Magistro G, Schott M, Keller P, Tamalunas A, Atzler M, Stief CG, Westhofen T. Enucleation vs. Resection: A Matched-pair Analysis of TURP, HoLEP and Bipolar TUEP in Medium-sized Prostates. Urology. 2021 Aug;154:221–226. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2021.04.004

3. Bergero MÁ, Álvarez JM, Cruz Liyo J, Dourado L, Menéndez N, Carlos D, Dipatto F, Tirapegui S. Adenomectomía simple laparoscópica versus adenomectomía simple abierta: un estudio comparativo [Laparoscopic adenomectomy versus open adenomectomy: A comparative study.]. Arch Esp Urol. 2020 May;73(4):268–273. Spanish.

4. Enikeev ME, Sorokin NI, Enikeev DV, Sukhanov RB, Dymov AM, Khamrayev OKh, Davydov DS. Holmium laser enucleation in large benign prostatic hyperplasia cases – an alternative to open prostatectomy. Bashkortostan Medical Journal. 2015;10(3):249–251. (In Russ.).

5. Sun F, Yao H, Bao X, Wang X, Wang D, Zhang D, et al. The Efficacy and Safety of HoLEP for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia With Large Volume : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Am J Mens Health. 2022 Jul-Aug;16(4):15579883221113203. doi: 10.1177/15579883221113203

6. Surenkov DN, Kotov SV, Semenov RA, Bugaenko OA, Barabash MI, Dzhokhadze LS. The results of the first 150 HoLEP. Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention. 2021;20(S1):81–82. (In Russ.).

7. Popov SV, Orlov IN, Grin YeA, Demidov DA, Gulko AM, Sushina IV, et al. State of copulative function in patients after the holmium laser enuсleation of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology reports (St Petersburg). 2019;9(2):17–22. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17816/uroved9217-22

8. Yang Z, Wang X, Liu T. Thulium laser enucleation versus plasmakinetic resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective trial with 18-month follow-up. Urology. 2013 Feb;81(2):396–400. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.08.069

9. Glybochko PV, Alyaev YuG, Rapoport LM, Enikeev ME, Enikeev DV, Sorokin NI, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate hyperplasia: technical aspects. Andrology and Genital Surgery. 2015;16(4):55–59. (In Russ.).

10. Favorito LA. Editorial - Open retropubic prostatectomy for large prostates (Millin Surgery): Why not? It is safe! It is rapid! Complications are few and the learning curve is short! Int Braz J Urol. 2016 Jul-Aug;42(4):635–636. doi: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2016.04.01

11. Kogan MI, Naboka YuL, Ivanov SN. Assessment of the infectious factor in transurethral surgery of benign prostate hyperplasia. Urology Herald. 2021;9(3):79–91. (In Russ.). doi: 10.21886/2308-6424-2021-9-3-79-91

12. Hublarov OY. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate, features of the intervention. Urology Herald. 2014;2:25–40. (In Russ.).