VosT, et al. Years lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet2012; 380: 2163–2196.
2.
McCarthyJF. A new endoscopic plastic surgery of the prostate, diathermia and excision of vesical growths. J Urol1931; 26; 695–699.
3.
BlandyJPNotleyRGReynardJM. Transurethral Resection. London, New York: Pitmann Medical Publishing Co. Ltd., 1971, pp. 94–134.
4.
AhyaiSA, et al. Meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic enlargement. Eur Urol2010; 58: 384–397.
5.
ReichOGratzkeCStiefCG. Techniques and long-term results of surgical procedures for BPH. Eur Urol2006; 49: 970–978.
6.
ZwergelU, et al. Long-term results following transurethral resection of the prostate. Eur Urol1998; 33: 476–480.
7.
GravasS, et al. Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), including Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO). European Association of Urology Guidelines. Arnhem, Netherlands: European Association of Urology, 2016.
8.
MadersbacherS, et al. Reoperation, myocardial infarction and mortality after transurethral and open prostatectomy: a nation-wide, long-term analysis of 23,123 cases. Eur Urol2005; 47: 499–504.
9.
ReichO, et al. Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol2008; 180: 246–249.
10.
EmbertonM, et al. The National Prostatectomy Audit: the clinical management of patients during hospital admission. Br J Urol1995; 75: 301–316.
11.
MadersbacherSMarbergerM. Is transurethral resection of the prostate still justified?BJU Int1999; 83: 227–237.
12.
MamoulakisCUbbinkDTde la RosetteJJ. Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. European Urology2009; 56: 798–809.
13.
AutorinoR, et al. Four-year outcome of a prospective randomised trial comparing bipolar plasmakinetic and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. European Urology2009; 55: 922–999.
14.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The TURis system for transurethral resection of the prostate. NICE, London, 2015.
15.
BurkeN, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of transurethral resection of the prostate versus minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction. Urology2010; 75: 1015–1022.
16.
XieCY, et al. Five-year follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial comparing bipolar plasmakinetic and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate. Yonsei Med J2012; 53: 734–741.
17.
AkmanT, et al. Effects of bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate on urinary and erectile function: a prospective randomized comparative study. BJU Int2013; 111: 129–136.
18.
MamoulakisC, et al. Bipolar vs monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: evaluation of the impact on overall sexual function in an international randomized controlled trial setting. BJU Int2013; 112: 109–120.
19.
KomuraK, et al. Incidence of urethral stricture after bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate using TURis: results from a randomised trial. BJU Int2015; 115: 644–652.
20.
ChenS, et al. Plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate compared with open prostatectomy for prostates larger than 100 grams: a randomized noninferiority controlled trial with long-term results at 6 years. Eur Urol2014; 66: 284–291.
21.
RaoJM, et al. Plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate versus transvesical open prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia >80 mL: 12-month follow-up results of a randomized clinical trial. Urology2013; 82: 176–181.
22.
Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Plasma Vaporization of the Prostate for Treatment of Benign Prostatic. Ottawa, ON, Canada: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2014.
23.
CornuJN, et al. A Systematic review and meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic obstruction: an update. Eur Urol2015; 67: 1066–1096.
24.
YangQ, et al. Transurethral incision compared with transurethral resection of the prostate for bladder outlet obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Urol2001; 165: 1526–1532.
25.
TkoczMPrajsnerA. Comparison of long-term results of transurethral incision of the prostate with transurethral resection of the prostate, in patients with benign prostatic hypertrophy. Neurourol Urodyn2002; 21: 112–116.
26.
MurphyLJT. The History of Urology. Springfield, Il: Charles C. Thomas Pub Ltd., 1972.
27.
TubaroAde NunzioC. The current role of open surgery in BPH. Eur Urol Suppl2006; 4: 191–201.
28.
VarkarakisI, et al. Long-term results of open transvesical prostatectomy from a contemporary series of patients. Urology2004; 64: 306–310.
29.
GratzkeC, et al. Complications and early postoperative outcome after open prostatectomy in patients with benign prostatic enlargement: results of a prospective multicenter study. J Urol2007; 177: 1419–1422.
30.
KuntzRMLehrichKSaschaAA. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates greater than 100 grams: 5 year follow-up results of a randomised clinical trial. Eur Urol2008; 53: 160–168.
31.
MaoyinLi, et al. Endoscopic enucleation versus open prostatectomy for treating large benign prostatic hyperplasia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One2015; 10: e0121265.
32.
LuccaI, et al. Outcomes of minimally invasive simple prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol2015; 33: 563–570.
33.
YerushalmiA, et al. Localized deep microwave hyperthermia in the treatment of poor operative risk patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol1985; 133: 873–876.
34.
HoffmanRM, et al. Microwave thermotherapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2012; 12(9).
35.
SchelinS, et al. Feedback microwave thermotherapy versus TURP/prostate enucleation surgery in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and persistent urinary retention: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study. Urology2006; 68: 795–799.
36.
BoyleP, et al. A meta-analysis of trials of transurethral needle ablation for treating symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int2004; 94: 83–88.
37.
BouzaC, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of transurethral needle ablation in symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. BMC Urol2006; 6: 1.
ArmitageJN, et al. Epithelializing stent for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review of the literature. J Urol2007; 177: 1619–1624.
40.
ArmitageJN, et al. The thermo-expandable metallic stent for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review. BJU Int2006; 98: 806–810.
41.
WooHH, et al. 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 Int2011; 108: 82–88.
42.
PereraM, et al. 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 Urol2015; 67: 704–713.
43.
RoehrbornCG, et al. Five year results of the prospective randomized controlled prostatic urethral L.I.F.T. study. Can J Urol2017; 24: 8802–8813.
44.
SønksenJ, et al. Prospective, randomized, multinational study of prostatic urethral lift versus transurethral resection of the prostate: 12-month results from the BPH6 study. Eur Urol2015; 68: 643–652.
45.
GoyaN, et al. Transurethral ethanol injection therapy for prostatic hyperplasia: 3-year results. J Urol2004; 172: 1017–1020.
46.
BrisindaG, et al. Relief by botulinum toxin of lower urinary tract symptoms owing to benign prostatic hyperplasia: early and long-term results. Urology2009; 73: 90–94.
47.
CarnevaleFC, et al. Prostatic artery embolization as a primary treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia: preliminary results in two patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol2010; 33: 355–361.
48.
CizmanZIsaacsonABurkeC. Short- to midterm safety and efficacy of prostatic artery embolization: a systematic review. J Vasc Interv Radiol. Epub ahead of print 2016. pii: S1051-0443(16)30066-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.04.015.
49.
PiscoJM, et al. Medium- and long-term outcome of prostate artery embolization for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: results in 630 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. Epub ahead of print 2016. pii: S1051-0443(16)30034-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.04.015.
50.
KoshibaK, et al. Does transurethral resection of the prostate pose a risk to life?22-year outcome. J Urol1995; 153: 1506–1509.
51.
PorpigliaF, et al. Temporary implantable nitinol device (TIND): a novel, minimally invasive treatment for relief of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): feasibility, safety and functional results at 1 year of follow-up. BJU Int2015; 116: 278–287.
52.
PorpigliaF, et al. 3-Year follow-up of temporary implantable nitinol device implantation for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction. BJU Int2018; 122: 106–112.
53.
MynderseLA, et al. Rezum system water vapor treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia: validation of convective thermal energy transfer and characterization with magnetic resonance imaging and 3-dimensional renderings. Urology2015; 86: 122–127.
54.
McVaryKTRoehrbornCG. Three-year outcomes of the prospective, randomized controlled rezūm system study: convective radiofrequency thermal therapy for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology2018; 111: 1–9.
55.
DarsonMF, et al. Procedural techniques and multicenter postmarket experience using minimally invasive convective radiofrequency thermal therapy with Rezūm system for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Res Rep Urol2017; 9: 159–168.
56.
MacRaeCGillingP. How I do it: aquablation of the prostate using the AQUABEAM system. Can J Urol2016; 23: 8590–8593.
57.
GillingP, et al. Aquablation – image-guided robot-assisted waterjet ablation of the prostate: initial clinical experience. BJU Int2016; 117: 923–929.
58.
GillingP, et al. Aquablation of the prostate for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: one-year results. J Urol2017; 197: 1565–1572.
59.
GillingP, et al. WATER: a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of aquablation vs transurethral resection of the prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol2018; 199: 1252–1261.
60.
GillingPJKennettKDasAK, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) combined with transurethral tissue morcellation: an update on the early clinical experience. J Endourol1998; 12: 457–459.
61.
GillingPJCassCBMalcolmAR, et al. Combination holmium and Nd:YAG laser ablation of the prostate: initial clinical experience. J Endourol1995; 9: 151–153.
62.
KrambeckAEHandaSELingemanJE. Experience with more than 1,000 holmium laser prostate enucleations for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol2013; 189 (1 Suppl.): S141–S155.
63.
KuntzRM, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates greater than 100 grams: 5-year follow-up results of a randomised clinical trial. Eur Urol2008; 53: 160.
64.
NasproR, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates >70 g: 24-month follow-up. Eur Urol2006; 50: 563.
65.
KimMPiaoSLeeHE, et al. Efficacy and safety of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for extremely large prostatic adenoma in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Korean J Urol2015; 56: 218–226.
66.
MitchellCRMynderseLALightnerDJ, et al. Efficacy of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in patients with non-neurogenic impaired bladder contractility: results of a prospective trial. Urology2014; 83: 428–432.
67.
TanA, et al. Meta-analysis of holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for symptomatic prostatic obstruction. Br J Surg2007; 94: 1201.
68.
YinL, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Endourol2013; 27: 604.
69.
ElmansyH, et al. Holmium laser enucleation versus photoselective vaporization for prostatic adenoma greater than 60 ml: preliminary results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. J Urol2012; 188: 216.
70.
KimMSongSHKuJH, et al. Pilot study of the clinical efficacy of ejaculatory hood sparing technique for ejaculation preservation in holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. Int J Impot Res2015; 27: 20–24.
71.
GravasSBachmannAReichO, et al. Critical review of lasers in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). BJU Int2011; 107: 1030–1043.
72.
HoekstraRJVan MelickHHKokET, et al. A 10-year follow-up after transurethral resection of the prostate, contact laser prostatectomy and electrovaporization in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia; long-term results of a randomized controlled trial. BJU Int2010; 106: 822–826.
73.
WooH, et al. Outcome of GreenLight HPS 120-W laser therapy in specific patient populations: those in retention, on anticoagulants, and with large prostates (>80 ml). Eur Urol Suppl2008; 7: 378.
74.
RajbabuK, et al. Photoselective vaporization of the prostate with the potassium–titanyl–phosphate laser in men with prostates of >100 mL. BJU Int2007; 100: 593.
75.
ChungDE, et al. Outcomes and complications after 532 nm laser prostatectomy in anticoagulated patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol2011; 186: 977.
76.
LeeDJ, et al. Laser vaporization of the prostate with the 180-W XPS-Greenlight laser in patients with ongoing platelet aggregation inhibition and oral anticoagulation. Urology2016; 91: 167.
77.
ThangasamyIA, et al. Photoselective vaporisation of the prostate using 80-W and 120-W laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review with meta-analysis from 2002 to 2012. Eur Urol2012; 62: 315.
78.
ZhouY, et al. Greenlight high-performance system (HPS) 120-W laser vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a meta-analysis of the published results of randomized controlled trials. Lasers Med Sci2016; 31: 485.
79.
ThomasJA, et al. A multicenter randomized noninferiority trial comparing GreenLight-XPS laser vaporization of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: two-year outcomes of the GOLIATH Study. Eur Urol2016; 69: 94.
80.
TangKXuZXiaD, et al. Early outcomes of thulium laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. J Endourol2014; 28: 65–72.
81.
CuiD, et al. A randomized trial comparing thulium laser resection to standard transurethral resection of the prostate for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: four-year follow-up results. World J Urol2014; 32: 683.
82.
SunF, et al. Long-term results of thulium laser resection of the prostate: a prospective study at multiple centers. World J Urol2015; 33: 503.
83.
GrossAJNetschCKnipperS, et al. Complications and early postoperative outcome in 1080 patients after thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate: results at a single institution. Eur Urol2013; 63: 859–867.
84.
NetschCPohlmannLHerrmannTR, et al. 120-W 2-Μm thulium:yttrium aluminium–garnet vapoenucleation of the prostate: 12-month follow-Up. BJU Int2012; 110: 96–101.
85.
YangZWangXLiuT. Thulium laser enucleation versus plasmakinetic resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective trial with 18-month follow-up. Urology2013; 81: 396–400.
86.
YangZ, et al. Comparison of thulium laser enucleation and plasmakinetic resection of the prostate in a randomized prospective trial with 5-year follow-up. Lasers Med Sci2016; 31: 1797.
87.
ChangCHLinTPChangYH, et al. Vapoenucleation of the prostate using a high-power thulium laser: a one-year follow-up study. BMC Urol2015; 15: 40.
88.
BachT, et al. Laser treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: basics and physical differences. Eur Urol2012; 61: 317.
89.
RazzaghiMR, et al. Diode laser (980 nm) vaporization in comparison with transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomized clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. Urology2014; 84: 526.
90.
CetinkayaM, et al. 980-Nm Diode laser vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomized controlled study. Urol J2015; 12: 2355.
91.
YangSSHsiehCHLeeYS, et al. Diode laser (980 nm) enucleation of the prostate: a promising alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate. Lasers Med Sci2013; 28: 353–360.
92.
XuA, et al. A randomized trial comparing diode laser enucleation of the prostate with plasmakinetic enucleation and resection of the prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Endourol2013; 27: 1254.
