Comparison of 532-nm GreenLight HPS laser with 980-nm diode laser vaporization of the prostate in treating patients with lower urinary tract symptom secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a meta-analysis

• Published in: Lasers in medical science Vol. 36; no. 9; pp. 1897 - 1907
• Main Authors: Zhou, Zhongbao, Cui, Yuanshan, Zhang, Xiaoyi, Zhang, Yong
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Springer London 01.12.2021; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Adverse events; Bleeding; Catheterization; Complications; Dentistry; Hyperplasia; Lasers; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Meta-analysis; Optical Devices; Optics; Original Article; Patients; Photonics; Prostate; Quality of life; Quantum Optics; Semiconductor lasers; Surgery; Urinary tract; Urination; Urogenital system; Vaporization; 980-nm diode laser; Benign prostatic hyperplasia; 532-nm GreenLight HPS laser; Lower urinary tract symptom; Meta-analysis; Laser vaporization of the prostate
• ISSN: 0268-8921; 1435-604X
• DOI: 10.1007/s10103-021-03255-8

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 532-nm GreenLight HPS laser (PVP) vs 980-nm diode laser vaporization of the prostate (DVP) in treating patients with lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). PubMed, Cochrane Library databases, EMBASE (until Jun 2020), and original references of the included articles were searched. PRISMA checklist was followed. A total of four articles including 521 patients were studied. There was no significant difference in total operating time and lasering time of the two laser surgeries; however, a higher amount of total applied laser energy was delivered with DVP ( P < 0.00001). The catheterization time after surgery in the PVP group was significantly longer than that in the DVP group ( P = 0.0008), whereas the hospitalization time was significantly shorter than that in the DVP group ( P = 0.02). Compared with baseline, there were significant improvements in the voiding variables over the observation period after surgery in both groups. PVP had a significant improvement in total international prostate symptom score (IPSS) ( P = 0.0002) and quality of life (QoL) index ( P = 0.003) compared with DVP after ≥12 months of postoperative follow-up. For complications after surgery, PVP had a larger number in needing for electrocautery to control bleeding ( P = 0.02). Besides, the application of DVP resulted in a higher incidence of bladder neck contracture ( P = 0.0007), dysuria (≥1 month) ( P = 0.002), transient incontinence ( P = 0.003), postoperative recatheterization ( P = 0.02), and reoperation ( P < 0.0001). The voiding parameters and micturition symptoms of patients with BPH after two kinds of laser surgery were significantly improved. However, PVP was more beneficial than DVP in terms of total IPSS, QoL index, and hospitalization time. Moreover, PVP showed a lower incidence of postoperative adverse events, but a higher risk of postoperative bleeding. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020203222