nach oben

Erschienen in:

04.11.2021 | Benigne Prostatahyperplasie | CME

Minimal-invasive Therapieoptionen zur Behandlung des benignen Prostatasyndroms

verfasst von: J. Franz, R. Suarez-Ibarrola, Dr. med. D. S. Schoeb, Prof. Dr. med. C. Gratzke, Prof. Dr. Dr. med. univ. A. Miernik, FEBU, MHBA

Erschienen in: Die Urologie | Ausgabe 12/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Zusammenfassung

Das benigne Prostatasyndrom ist eine der häufigsten Erkrankungen des alternden Mannes. Durch die Hyperplasie des Drüsengewebes können belastende Symptome des unteren Harntrakts entstehen, die sowohl medikamentös als auch interventionell therapiert werden können. Lange Zeit wurden dabei die transurethrale Resektion der Prostata und die suprapubische Adenomenukleation als Goldstandard der operativen Therapie angesehen. Um Patienten eine ambulante, komplikationsarme Therapie mit kürzeren Krankenhausaufenthalten und gleichzeitig hoher Effektivität anbieten zu können, wurde eine Vielzahl minimal-invasiver Therapieoptionen entwickelt. Während Empfehlungen bereits für die Exzision durch fokussierten Wasserstrahl, den prostatisch-urethralen Lift sowie die Prostataarterienembolisation ausgesprochen wurden, gibt es weitere vielversprechende Verfahren, für die jedoch noch Langzeitdaten und Daten aus Vergleichsstudien zu Referenzverfahren abgewartet werden müssen.

Berry SJ, Coffey DS, Walsh PC, Ewing LL (1984) The development of human benign prostatic hyperplasia with age. J Urol 132(3):474–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)49698-4CrossRefPubMed

Egan KB (2016) The epidemiology of benign prostatic hyperplasia associated with lower urinary tract symptoms: prevalence and incident rates. Urol Clin North Am 43(3):289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2016.04.001CrossRefPubMed

Vuichoud C, Loughlin KR (2015) Benign prostatic hyperplasia: epidemiology, economics and evaluation. Can J Urol 22(1):1–6PubMed

Gravas S, Cornu JN, Gacci M et al (2021) EAU guidelines on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), incl. benign prostatic obstructions (BPO). EAU Annual Congress Milan, 2021

Gratzke C, Schlenker B, Seitz M et al (2007) Complications and early postoperative outcome after open prostatectomy in patients with benign prostatic enlargement: results of a prospective multicenter study. J Urol 177(4):1419–1422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2006.11.062CrossRefPubMed

Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A et al (2008) Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol 180(1):246–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.03.058CrossRefPubMed

Zhang Y, Yuan P, Ma D et al (2019) Efficacy and safety of enucleation vs. resection of prostate for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 22(4):493–508. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-019-0135-4CrossRefPubMed

Marra G, Sturch P, Oderda M, Tabatabaei S, Muir G, Gontero P (2016) Systematic review of lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical treatments on men’s ejaculatory function: time for a bespoke approach? Int J Urol 23(1):22–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.12866CrossRefPubMed

Gravas S, Cornu JN, Drake M et al (2018) EAU guidelines on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), incl. benign prostatic obstruction (BPO)

10.

Aoun F, Marcelis Q, Roumeguère T (2015) Minimally invasive devices for treating lower urinary tract symptoms in benign prostate hyperplasia: technology update. Res Rep Urol 7:125–136. https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S55340CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Gravas S, Cornu J, Gacci M et al (2019) EAU guidelines on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), incl. benign prostatic obstruction (BPO)

12.

Armitage JN, Cathcart PJ, Rashidian A, De Nigris E, Emberton M, van der Meulen JHP (2007) Epithelializing stent for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review of the literature. J Urol 177(5):1619–1624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.005CrossRefPubMed

13.

MacRae C, Gilling P (2016) How I do it: aquablation of the prostate using the aquabeam system. Can J Urol 23(6):8590–8593PubMed

14.

Müllhaupt G, Enzler-Tschudy A, Horg K et al (2021) Informative value of histological assessment of tissue acquired during aquablation of the prostate. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00345-020-03426-2CrossRefPubMed

15.

Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M et al (2020) Three-year outcomes after aquablation therapy compared to TURP: results from a blinded randomized trial. Can J Urol 27(1):10072–10079PubMed

16.

Gross AJ, Lipp MJ, Baumbach R et al (2021) Rectal perforation after aquablation of the prostate: lessons learned the hard way. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00345-021-03660-2CrossRefPubMed

17.

Desai M, Bidair M, Zorn KC et al (2019) Aquablation for benign prostatic hyperplasia in large prostates (80–150 mL): 6‑month results from the WATER II trial. BJU Int 124(2):321–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/BJU.14703CrossRefPubMed

18.

Desai M, Bidair M, Bhojani N et al (2020) Aquablation for benign prostatic hyperplasia in large prostates (80–150 cc): 2‑year results. Can J Urol 27(2):10147–10153PubMed

19.

Abt D, Hechelhammer L, Müllhaupt G et al (2018) Comparison of prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial. BMJ 361:k2338. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k2338CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Zhang JL, Wang MQ, Shen YG et al (2019) Effectiveness of contrast-enhanced MR angiography for visualization of the prostatic artery prior to prostatic arterial embolization. Radiology 291(2):370–378. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019181524CrossRefPubMed

21.

Zumstein V, Betschart P, Vetterlein MW et al (2019) Prostatic artery embolization versus standard surgical treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus 5(6):1091–1100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.09.005CrossRefPubMed

22.

Abt D, Müllhaupt G, Hechelhammer L et al (2021) Prostatic artery embolisation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: 2‑yr outcomes of a randomised, open-label, single-centre trial. Eur Urol 80(1):34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2021.02.008CrossRefPubMed

23.

Shim SR, Kanhai KJK, Ko YM, Kim JH (2017) Efficacy and safety of prostatic arterial embolization: systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression. J Urol 197(2):465–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.100CrossRefPubMed

24.

Jiang YL, Qian LJ (2019) Transurethral resection of the prostate versus prostatic artery embolization in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a meta-analysis. BMC Urol. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0440-1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Couture F, Belzile F, Noël-Lamy M, Ponsot Y, Tu LM (2020) Images—penile necrotic ulcer following prostatic artery embolization: a rare complication. Can Urol Assoc J 14(7):E347. https://doi.org/10.5489/CUAJ.6239CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Moreira AM, de Assis AM, Carnevale FC, Antunes AA, Srougi M, Cerri GG (2017) A review of adverse events related to prostatic artery embolization for treatment of bladder outlet obstruction due to BPH. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 40(10):1490–1500. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00270-017-1765-3CrossRefPubMed

27.

McVary KT, Gange SN, Gittelman MC et al (2016) Erectile and ejaculatory function preserved with convective water vapor energy treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomized controlled study. J Sex Med 13(6):924–933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.03.372CrossRefPubMed

28.

McVary KT, Rogers T, Roehrborn CG (2019) Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: 4‑year results from randomized controlled study. Urology 126:171–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2018.12.041CrossRefPubMed

29.

Parikh KA, Dora CD (2019) Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate after failed urolift: surgical considerations for the management of nonabsorbable implants. Urology 132:212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.06.027CrossRefPubMed

30.

Perera M, Roberts MJ, Doi SAR, Bolton D (2015) Prostatic urethral lift improves urinary symptoms and flow while preserving sexual function for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 67(4):704–713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.031CrossRefPubMed

31.

Woo HH, Bolton DM, Laborde E et al (2012) Preservation of sexual function with the prostatic urethral lift: a novel treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Sex Med 9(2):568–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02568.xCrossRefPubMed

32.

Woo HH, Chin PT, McNicholas TA et al (2011) Safety and feasibility of the prostatic urethral lift: a novel, minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). BJU Int 108(1):82–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10342.xCrossRefPubMed

33.

Roehrborn CG, Gange SN, Shore ND et al (2013) The prostatic urethral lift for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with prostate enlargement due to benign prostatic hyperplasia: the L.I.F.T. study. J Urol 190(6):2161–2167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.116CrossRefPubMed

34.

McNicholas TA, Woo HH, Chin PT et al (2013) Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift: surgical technique and multinational experience. Eur Urol 64(2):292–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.01.008CrossRefPubMed

35.

Chin PT, Bolton DM, Jack G et al (2012) Prostatic urethral lift: two-year results after treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 79(1):5–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.10.021CrossRefPubMed

36.

Roehrborn CG, Barkin J, Gange SN et al (2017) Five year results of the prospective randomized controlled prostatic urethral L.I.F.T. study. Can J Urol 24(3):8802–8813PubMed

37.

Gratzke C, Barber N, Speakman MJ et al (2017) Prostatic urethral lift vs transurethral resection of the prostate: 2‑year results of the BPH6 prospective, multicentre, randomized study. BJU Int 119(5):767–775. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13714CrossRefPubMed

38.

Rukstalis D, Grier D, Stroup SP et al (2019) Prostatic urethral lift (PUL) for obstructive median lobes: 12 month results of the MedLift study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 22(3):411–419. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-018-0118-xCrossRefPubMed

39.

Porpiglia F, Fiori C, Bertolo R et al (2018) 3‑Year follow-up of temporary implantable nitinol device implantation for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction. BJU Int 122(1):106–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14141CrossRefPubMed

40.

Kadner G, Valerio M, Giannakis I et al (2020) Second generation of temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in men with LUTS: 2 year results of the MT-02-study. World J Urol 38(12):3235–3244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03140-zCrossRefPubMed

41.

Amparore D, De Cillis S, Volpi G et al (2019) First- and second-generation temporary Implantable nitinol devices as minimally invasive treatments for BPH-related LUTS: systematic review of the literature. Curr Urol Rep 20(8):47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-019-0912-6CrossRefPubMed

42.

Porpiglia F, Fiori C, Amparore D et al (2019) Second-generation of temporary implantable nitinol device for the relief of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of a prospective, multicentre study at 1 year of follow-up. BJU Int 123(6):1061–1069. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14608CrossRefPubMed

43.

Magistro G, Stief CG, Gratzke C (2015) New intraprostatic injectables and prostatic urethral lift for male LUTS. Nat Rev Urol 12(8):461–471. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2015.169CrossRefPubMed

44.

Shim SR, Cho YJ, Shin IS, Kim JH (2016) Efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin injection for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urol Nephrol 48(1):19–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-015-1153-3CrossRefPubMed

45.

Elhilali MM, Pommerville P, Yocum RC, Merchant R, Roehrborn CG, Denmeade SR (2013) Prospective, randomized, double-blind, vehicle controlled, multicenter phase IIb clinical trial of the pore forming protein PRX302 for targeted treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 189(4):1421–1426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.003CrossRefPubMed

46.

Denmeade SR, Egerdie B, Steinhoff G, Merchant R, Abi-Habib R, Pommerville P (2011) Phase 1 and 2 studies demonstrate the safety and efficacy of intraprostatic injection of PRX302 for the targeted treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol 59(5):747–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.11.024CrossRefPubMed

47.

Shore N, Tutrone R, Efros M et al (2018) Fexapotide triflutate: results of long-term safety and efficacy trials of a novel injectable therapy for symptomatic prostate enlargement. World J Urol 36(5):801–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2185-yCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Minimal-invasive Therapieoptionen zur Behandlung des benignen Prostatasyndroms
verfasst von: J. Franz
R. Suarez-Ibarrola
Dr. med. D. S. Schoeb
Prof. Dr. med. C. Gratzke
Prof. Dr. Dr. med. univ. A. Miernik, FEBU, MHBA
Publikationsdatum: 04.11.2021
Verlag: Springer Medizin
Schlagwörter: Benigne Prostatahyperplasie
Benigne Prostatahyperplasie
TURP
Erschienen in: Die Urologie / Ausgabe 12/2021
Print ISSN: 2731-7064
Elektronische ISSN: 2731-7072
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-021-01702-6

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Zusammenfassung

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2021

Paradigmenwechsel in der Therapie des primär oligometastasierten PCA

Expertenkonsens zu Innovationen beim fortgeschrittenen Prostatakarzinom

BvDU Kurz notiert

Mitteilungen der DGU

Lokal fortgeschrittene oder oligometastasierte Blasenkarzinome – Stellenwert der Lokaltherapie von Primärtumor und Metastasen

Termine