Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The New American Urological Association Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Clinical Guidelines: 2019 Update

  • Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (K McVary, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The goal of this paper was to analyze the efficacy of the current modalities available to surgically treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

Recent Findings

There have been significant surgical advancements for the treatment of BPH, including an increasing development and utilization of minimally invasive surgical techniques (MISTs). These procedures have varying outcomes that are critical to understand. In addition, MISTs have important adverse effects, though have minimized effects on sexual function when compared to more invasive surgical techniques.

Summary

It is important for all urologists to be familiar with the surgical techniques available to treat BPH and the updated American Urological Association (AUA) Guidelines. Further studies evaluating efficacy, safety, and sexual functioning will help guide care in the future and evolve practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Lee C, Kozlowski JM, Grayhack JT. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors controlling benign prostatic growth. Prostate. 1997;31:131–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Auffenberg GB, Helfand BT, McVary KT. Established medical therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia [Internet]. Urologic Clinics of North America. 2009. p. 443–59. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2009.07.004, 2009.

  3. Wei JT, Calhoun E, Jacobsen SJ. Urologic diseases in america project: benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2008;179:S75–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Berry SJ, Coffey DS, Walsh PC, Ewing LL. The development of human benign prostatic hyperplasia with age. J Urol. 1984;132:474–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chute CG, Panser LA, Girman CJ, Oesterling JE, Guess HA, Jacobsen SJ, et al. The prevalence of prostatism: a population-based survey of urinary symptoms. J Urol. 1993;150:85–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Meigs JB, Barry MJ, Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, Kawachi I. Incidence rates and risk factors for acute urinary retention: the health professionals followup study. J Urol. 1999;162:376–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Taub DA, Wei JT. The economics of benign prostatic hyperplasia and lower urinary tract symptoms in the United States. Curr Urol Rep. 2006;7:272–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. •• Foster HE, Dahm P, Kohler TS, Lerner LB, Parsons JK, Wilt TJ, et al. Surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia: AUA Guideline Amendment 2019. J Urol. 2019;202:592–8 AUA Guideline statements for which this manuscript serves as a review.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cornu J-N, Ahyai S, Bachmann A, de la Rosette J, Gilling P, Gratzke C, 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 Urol. 2015;67:1066–96.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tang Y, Li J, Pu C, Bai Y, Yuan H, Wei Q, et al. Bipolar transurethral resection versus monopolar transurethral resection for benign prostatic hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol. 2014;28:1107–14.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Omar MI, Lam TB, Alexander CE, Graham J, Mamoulakis C, Imamura M, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of bipolar compared with monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). BJU Int. 2014;113:24–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Burke N, Whelan JP, Goeree L, Hopkins RB, Campbell K, Goeree R, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of transurethral resection of the prostate versus minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction. Urology. 2010;75:1015–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mamoulakis C, Ubbink DT, de la Rosette JJMCH. Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Urol. 2009;56:798–809.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Alexander CE, Scullion MM, Omar MI, Yuan Y, Mamoulakis C, N’Dow JM, et al. Bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;12:CD009629.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. El-Assmy A, ElShal AM, Mekkawy R, El-Kappany H, Ibrahiem EHI. Erectile and ejaculatory functions changes following bipolar versus monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective randomized study. Int Urol Nephrol. 2018;50:1569–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Geavlete B, Bulai C, Ene C, Checherita I, Geavlete P. Bipolar vaporization, resection, and enucleation versus open prostatectomy: optimal treatment alternatives in large prostate cases? J Endourol. 2015;29:323–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Shenoy SP, Marla PK, Adappa KK. RE Rubiao et al.: A randomized trial of transvesical prostatectomy versus transurethral resection of the prostate for prostate greater than 80 mL (Urology 2010;76;958–961). Urology. 2011. p. 764; author reply 764–5.

  19. Simforoosh N, Abdi H, Kashi AH, Zare S, Tabibi A, Danesh A, et al. Open prostatectomy versus transurethral resection of the prostate, where are we standing in the new era? A randomized controlled trial. Urol J. 2010;7:262–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Xie J-B, Tan Y-A, Wang F-L, Xuan Q, Sun Y-W, Xiao J, et al. Extraperitoneal laparoscopic adenomectomy (Madigan) versus bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia greater than 80 ml: complications and functional outcomes after 3-year follow-up. J Endourol. 2014;28:353–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Li J, Cao D, Peng L, Ren Z, Gou H, Li Y, et al. Comparison between minimally invasive simple prostatectomy and open simple prostatectomy for large prostates: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials. J Endourol. 2019;33:767–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sorokin I, Sundaram V, Singla N, Walker J, Margulis V, Roehrborn C, et al. Robot-assisted versus open simple prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands: a propensity score-matched comparison of perioperative and short-term outcomes. J Endourol. 2017;31:1164–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mourmouris P, Keskin SM, Skolarikos A, Argun OB, Karagiannis AA, Tufek I, et al. A prospective comparative analysis of robot-assisted vs open simple prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int. 2019;123:313–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Autorino R, Zargar H, Mariano MB, Sanchez-Salas R, Sotelo RJ, Chlosta PL, et al. Perioperative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic simple prostatectomy: a European-American multi-institutional analysis. Eur Urol. 2015;68:86–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pavan N, Zargar H, Sanchez-Salas R, Castillo O, Celia A, Gallo G, et al. Robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopy for simple prostatectomy: multicenter comparative outcomes. Urology. 2016;91:104–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Marra G, Sturch P, Oderda M, Tabatabaei S, Muir G, Gontero P. Systematic review of lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical treatments on men’s ejaculatory function: time for a bespoke approach? [Internet]. International Journal of Urology. 2016. p. 22–35. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.12866.

  27. Simone G, Misuraca L, Anceschi U, Minisola F, Ferriero M, Guaglianone S, et al. Urethra and ejaculation preserving robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: near-infrared fluorescence imaging-guided Madigan technique. Eur Urol. 2019;75:492–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Thomas JA, Tubaro A, Barber N, d’Ancona F, Muir G, Witzsch U, 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-yr outcomes of the GOLIATH study. Eur Urol. 2016;69:94–102.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kumar A, Vasudeva P, Kumar N, Nanda B, Jha SK, Mohanty N. A prospective randomized comparative study of monopolar and bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate and photoselective vaporization of the prostate in patients who present with benign prostatic obstruction: a single center experience. J Endourol. 2013;27:1245–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kumar N, Vasudeva P, Kumar A, Singh H. Prospective randomized comparison of monopolar TURP, bipolar TURP and photoselective vaporization of the prostate in patients with benign prostatic obstruction: 36 months outcome. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2018;10:17–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lee DJ, Rieken M, Halpern J, Zhao F, Pueschel H, Chughtai B, et al. Laser vaporization of the prostate with the 180-W XPS-Greenlight laser in patients with ongoing platelet aggregation inhibition and Oral anticoagulation. Urology. 2016;91:167–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Knapp GL, Chalasani V, Woo HH. Perioperative adverse events in patients on continued anticoagulation undergoing photoselective vaporisation of the prostate with the 180-W Greenlight lithium triborate laser. BJU Int. 2017;119(Suppl 5):33–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Wu B, Li J, Xu Q, Hou R, Jia W, Chen Q. Vaporization of prostate by 160W GreenLight laser on postoperative erectile function-a single center report. Urology. 2019;132:164–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Spaliviero M, Strom KH, Gu X, Araki M, Culkin DJ, Wong C. Does Greenlight HPS(™) laser photoselective vaporization prostatectomy affect sexual function? J Endourol. 2010;24:2051–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Terrasa J-B, Cornu J-N, Haab F, Cussenot O, Lukacs B. Prospective, multidimensional evaluation of sexual disorders in men after laser photovaporization of the prostate. J Sex Med. 2013;10:1363–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Naspro R, Gomez Sancha F, Manica M, Meneghini A, Ahyai S, Aho T, et al. From “gold standard” resection to reproducible “future standard” endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: what we know about anatomical enucleation. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2017;69:446–58.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cui D, Sun F, Zhuo J, Sun X, Han B, Zhao F, 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 Urol. 2014;32:683–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ahyai SA, Lehrich K, Kuntz RM. Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate: 3-year follow-up results of a randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol. 2007;52:1456–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Wilson LC, Gilling PJ, Williams A, Kennett KM, Frampton CM, Westenberg AM, et al. A randomised trial comparing holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection in the treatment of prostates larger than 40 grams: results at 2 years. Eur Urol. 2006;50:569–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Becker B, Herrmann TRW, Gross AJ, Netsch C. Thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate versus holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for the treatment of large volume prostates: preliminary 6-month safety and efficacy results of a prospective randomized trial. World J Urol. 2018;36:1663–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang F, Shao Q, Herrmann TRW, 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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Pirola GM, Saredi G, Duarte RC, Bernard L, Pacchetti A, Berti L, et al. Holmium laser versus thulium laser enucleation of the prostate: a matched-pair analysis from two centers [Internet]. Therapeutic Advances in Urology. 2018. p. 223–33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1756287218779784, 2018.

  43. Lerner LB, Rajender A. Laser prostate enucleation techniques. Can J Urol. 2015;22(Suppl 1):53–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bajic P, Noriega N, Gorbonos A, Karpman E. GreenLight laser enucleation of the prostate (GreenLEP): initial experience with a simplified technique. Urology. 2019;131:250–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Panthier F, Pasquier J, Bruel S, Azancot V, De La Taille A, Gasman D. En bloc greenlight laser enucleation of prostate (GreenLEP): about the first hundred cases. World J Urol [Internet]. 2019; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02941-1

  46. Craig KM, Lee RK. Point-Counterpoint: Greenlight laser enucleation for management of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a review of current literature. Curr Opin Urol [Internet]. 2019; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000611

  47. Misraï V, Pasquie M, Bordier B, Elman B, Lhez JM, Guillotreau J, et al. Comparison between open simple prostatectomy and green laser enucleation of the prostate for treating large benign prostatic hyperplasia: a single-centre experience. World J Urol. 2018;36:793–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. El Tayeb MM, Jacob JM, Bhojani N, Bammerlin E, Lingeman JE. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in patients requiring anticoagulation. J Endourol. 2016;30:805–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Rivera M, Krambeck A, Lingeman J. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in patients requiring anticoagulation. Curr Urol Rep. 2017;18:77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Zheng X, Peng L, Cao D, Han X, Xu H, Yang L, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in benign prostate hyperplasia patients with or without oral antithrombotic drugs: a meta-analysis. Int Urol Nephrol. 2019;51:2127–36.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Sener TE, Butticè S, Macchione L, Netsch C, Tanidir Y, Dragos L, et al. Thulium laser vaporesection of the prostate: can we operate without interrupting oral antiplatelet/anticoagulant therapy? Investig Clin Urol. 2017;58:192–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Netsch C, Stoehrer M, Brüning M, Gabuev A, Bach T, Herrmann TRW, et al. Safety and effectiveness of Thulium VapoEnucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) in patients on anticoagulant therapy. World J Urol. 2014;32:165–72.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Enikeev D, Glybochko P, Rapoport L, Okhunov Z, O’Leary M, Potoldykova N, et al. Impact of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate with thulium fiber laser on the erectile function. BMC Urol. 2018;18:87.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Pushkar P, Taneja R, Agarwal A. A prospective study to compare changes in male sexual function following holmium laser enucleation of prostate versus transurethral resection of prostate. Urol Ann. 2019;11:27–32.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Klett DE, Tyson MD 2nd, Mmeje CO, Nunez-Nateras R, Chang Y-H, Humphreys MR. Patient-reported sexual outcomes after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: a 3-year follow-up study. Urology. 2014;84:421–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Elshal AM, El-Assmy A, Mekkawy R, Taha D-E, El-Nahas AR, Laymon M, et al. Prospective controlled assessment of men’s sexual function changes following Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia. Int Urol Nephrol. 2017;49:1741–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Huet R, Peyronnet B, Khene Z-E, Freton L, Verhoest G, Manunta A, et al. Prospective assessment of the sexual function after Greenlight endoscopic enucleation and Greenlight 180W XPS photoselective vaporization of the prostate. Urology. 2019;131:184–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Peyronnet B, Robert G, Comat V, Rouprêt M, Gomez-Sancha F, Cornu J-N, et al. Learning curves and perioperative outcomes after endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a comparison between GreenLight 532-nm and holmium lasers. World J Urol. 2017;35:973–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Elshal AM, Nabeeh H, Eldemerdash Y, Mekkawy R, Laymon M, El-Assmy A, et al. Prospective assessment of learning curve of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia using a multidimensional approach. J Urol. 2017;197:1099–107.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Brunckhorst O, Ahmed K, Nehikhare O, Marra G, Challacombe B, Popert R. Evaluation of the learning curve for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate using multiple outcome measures. Urology. 2015;86:824–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Robert G, Cornu J-N, Fourmarier M, Saussine C, Descazeaud A, Azzouzi A-R, et al. Multicentre prospective evaluation of the learning curve of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). BJU Int. 2016;117:495–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Khene Z-E, Peyronnet B, Vincendeau S, Huet R, Gasmi A, Pradere B, et al. The surgical learning curve for endoscopic GreenLight™ laser enucleation of the prostate: an international multicentre study. BJU Int. 2020;125:153–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Kampantais S, Dimopoulos P, Tasleem A, Acher P, Gordon K, Young A. Assessing the learning curve of holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP). A Systematic Review Urology. 2018;120:9–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Johnson B, Sorokin I, Singla N, Roehrborn C, Gahan JC. Determining the learning curve for robot-assisted simple prostatectomy in surgeons familiar with robotic surgery. J Endourol. 2018;32:865–70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Michalak J, Tzou D, Funk J. HoLEP: the gold standard for the surgical management of BPH in the 21(st) century. Am J Clin Exp Urol. 2015;3:36–42.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Antunes AA, Iscaife A, Barbosa JABA, Dos Anjos G, Nahas WC, Srougi M. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate simulation: analysis of realism and level of difficulty by holmium laser enucleation of the prostate-naïve urologists. Urology. 2019;125:34–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Reich O, Gratzke C, Stief CG. Techniques and long-term results of surgical procedures for BPH. Eur Urol. 2006;49:970–8 discussion 978.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Kader OA-E, Abd-El Kader O, El Den KM, El Nashar A, Hussein A, Yehya E. Transurethral incision versus transurethral resection of the prostate in small prostatic adenoma: long-term follow-up [Internet]. African Journal of Urology. 2012. p. 29–33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afju.2012.04.007, 2012.

  69. McVary KT, Roehrborn CG, Avins AL, Barry MJ, Bruskewitz RC, Donnell RF, et al. Update on AUA guideline on the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2011;185:1793–803.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Mynderse LA, Hanson D, Robb RA, Pacik D, Vit V, Varga G, et al. Rezūm 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. Urology. 2015;86:122–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. • McVary KT, Gange SN, Gittelman MC, Goldberg KA, Patel K, Shore ND, et al. Minimally invasive prostate convective water vapor energy ablation: a multicenter, randomized, controlled study for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2016;195:1529–38 Initial experience with REZUM.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. McVary KT, Rogers T, Roehrborn CG. Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: 4-year results from randomized controlled study. Urology. 2019;126:171–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. McVary KT, Gange SN, Gittelman MC, Goldberg KA, Patel K, Shore ND, et al. 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. 2016;13:924–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. McVary KT, Rogers T, Mahon J, Gupta NK. Is sexual function better preserved after water vapor thermal therapy or medical therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia? J Sex Med. 2018;15:1728–38.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Darson MF, Alexander EE, Schiffman ZJ, Lewitton M, Light RA, Sutton MA, 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 Urol. 2017;9:159–68.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Mollengarden D, Goldberg K, Wong D, Roehrborn C. Convective radiofrequency water vapor thermal therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a single office experience. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2018;21:379–85.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Woo HH, Chin PT, McNicholas TA, Gill HS, Plante MK, Bruskewitz RC, 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 Int. 2011;108:82–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. • Roehrborn CG, Gange SN, Shore ND, Giddens JL, Bolton DM, Cowan BE, et al. 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. 2013;190:2161–7 Initial experience with prostatic urethral lift, UroLift.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Roehrborn CG, Barkin J, Gange SN, Shore ND, Giddens JL, Bolton DM, et al. Five year results of the prospective randomized controlled prostatic urethral L.I.F.T. study. Can J Urol. 2017;24:8802–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Gratzke C, Barber N, Speakman MJ, Berges R, Wetterauer U, Greene D, et al. Prostatic urethral lift vs transurethral resection of the prostate: 2-year results of the BPH6 prospective, multicentre, randomized study. BJU Int. 2017;119:767–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Perera M, Roberts MJ, Doi SAR, Bolton D. 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. 2015;67:704–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. McVary KT, Gange SN, Shore ND, Bolton DM, Cowan BE, Brown BT, et al. Treatment of LUTS secondary to BPH while preserving sexual function: randomized controlled study of prostatic urethral lift. J Sex Med. 2014;11:279–87.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Shah BB, Tayon K, Madiraju S, Carrion RE, Perito P. Prostatic urethral lift: does size matter? J Endourol. 2018;32:635–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Rukstalis D, Grier D, Stroup SP, Tutrone R, de Souza E, Freedman S, et al. Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) for obstructive median lobes: 12 month results of the MedLift Study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2019;22:411–419.

  85. Floratos DL, Lambertus A L, Rossi C, Kortmann BBM, Debruyne FMJ, de la ROSETTE JJMCH. Long-term followup of randomized transurethral microwave thermotherapy versus transurethral prostatic resection study [Internet]. The Journal of Urology. 2001. p. 1533–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1097/00005392-200105000-00030, 2001.

  86. Nørby B, Nielsen HV, Frimodt-Møller PC. Transurethral interstitial laser coagulation of the prostate and transurethral microwave thermotherapy vs transurethral resection or incision of the prostate: results of a randomized, controlled study in patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int. 2002;90:853–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Schelin S, Geertsen U, Walter S, Spångberg A, Duelund-Jacobsen J, Krøyer K, 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. Urology. 2006;68:795–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Wagrell L, Schelin S, Nordling J, Richthoff J, Magnusson B, Schain M, et al. Feedback microwave thermotherapy versus TURP for clinical BPH—a randomized controlled multicenter study [Internet]. Urology. 2002. p. 292–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(02)01740-5, 2002.

  89. Mattiasson A, Wagrell L, Schelin S, Nordling J, Richthoff J, Magnusson B, et al. Five-year follow-up of feedback microwave thermotherapy versus TURP for clinical BPH: a prospective randomized multicenter study. Urology. 2007;69:91–6 discussion 96–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Bouza C, López T, Magro A, Navalpotro L, Amate JM. Systematic review and meta-analysis of transurethral needle ablation in symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. BMC Urol. 2006;6:14.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  91. Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M, Anderson P, Sutton M, Aho T, et al. WATER: a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of Aquablation ® vs transurethral resection of the prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia [Internet]. Journal of Urology. 2018. p. 1252–61. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.12.065, 2018.

  92. Gilling PJ, Barber N, Bidair M, Anderson P, Sutton M, Aho T, et al. Randomized controlled trial of aquablation versus transurethral resection of the prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia: one-year outcomes. Urology. 2019;125:169–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Pimentel MA, Yassaie O, Gilling P. Urodynamic outcomes after aquablation. Urology. 2019;126:165–70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Bhojani N, Nguyen D-D, Kaufman RP Jr, Elterman D, Zorn KC. Comparison of 100 cc prostates undergoing aquablation for benign prostatic hyperplasia. World J Urol. 2019;37:1361–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Bhojani N, Bidair M, Zorn KC, Trainer A, Arther A, Kramolowsky E, et al. Aquablation for benign prostatic hyperplasia in large prostates (80-150 cc): 1-year results. Urology. 2019;129:1–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Desai MM, Singh A, Abhishek S, Laddha A, Pandya H, Ashrafi AN, et al. Aquablation therapy for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: a single-centre experience in 47 patients. BJU Int. 2018;121:945–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Plante M, Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M, Anderson P, Sutton M, et al. Symptom relief and anejaculation after aquablation or transurethral resection of the prostate: subgroup analysis from a blinded randomized trial. BJU Int. 2019;123:651–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Hwang EC, Jung JH, Borofsky M, Kim MH, Dahm P. Aquablation of the prostate for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;2:CD013143.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Bach T, Giannakis I, Bachmann A, Fiori C, Gomez-Sancha F, Herrmann TRW, et al. Aquablation of the prostate: single-center results of a non-selected, consecutive patient cohort. World J Urol. 2019;37:1369–75.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Carnevale FC, Iscaife A, Yoshinaga EM, Moreira AM, Antunes AA, Srougi M. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) versus original and PErFecTED prostate artery embolization (PAE) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): preliminary results of a single center, prospective, urodynamic-controlled analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39:44–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Abt D, Hechelhammer L, Müllhaupt G, Markart S, Güsewell S, Kessler TM, et al. Comparison of prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial. BMJ. 2018;361:k2338.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Gao Y-A, Huang Y, Zhang R, Yang Y-D, Zhang Q, Hou M, et al. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: prostatic arterial embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate--a prospective, randomized, and controlled clinical trial. Radiology. 2014;270:920–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Ray AF, Powell J, Speakman MJ, Longford NT, DasGupta R, Bryant T, et al. Efficacy and safety of prostate artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an observational study and propensity-matched comparison with transurethral resection of the prostate (the UK-ROPE study). BJU Int. 2018;122:270–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Russo GI, Kurbatov D, Sansalone S, Lepetukhin A, Dubsky S, Sitkin I, et al. Prostatic arterial embolization vs open prostatectomy: a 1-year matched-pair analysis of functional outcomes and morbidities [Internet]. Urology. 2015. p. 343–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.04.037, 2015.

  105. Zumstein V, Betschart P, Vetterlein MW, Kluth LA, Hechelhammer L, Mordasini L, et al. 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. 2019;5:1091–100.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Müllhaupt G, Hechelhammer L, Diener P-A, Engeler DS, Güsewell S, Schmid H-P, et al. Ejaculatory disorders after prostatic artery embolization: a reassessment of two prospective clinical trials. World J Urol [Internet]. 2019; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-03036-7

  107. Al Rawashdah SF, Pastore AL, Velotti G, Fuschi A, Capone L, Suraci PP, et al. Sexual and functional outcomes of prostate artery embolisation: a prospective long-term follow-up, large cohort study. Int J Clin Pract. 2020;74:e13454.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Jones P, Rai BP, Aboumarzouk OM, Somani BK. Prostatic urethral lift vs prostate arterial embolization: novel nonablative strategies in the management of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostate hyperplasia. Urology. 2016;87:11–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Male Health, Department of Urology, Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S. First Ave., Maywood, IL, 60153, USA

    Ryan Dornbier, Gaurav Pahouja, Jeffrey Branch & Kevin T. McVary

Authors
  1. Ryan Dornbier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gaurav Pahouja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeffrey Branch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kevin T. McVary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryan Dornbier.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

J Branch reports a former consultanting relationship with Boston Scientific as a training proctor for GreenLight Technologies. K McVary discloses professional relationships with Olympus, Boston Scientific, SRS Medical, Merck, and MedeonBio, and has participated as a study site in clinical trials with Astellas, NIDDK, NxThera, and SRS. He is the Co-chair of the American Urological Association Guidelines for which this article serves as a review. R Dornbier reports no conflicts of interest. G Pahouja reports no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dornbier, R., Pahouja, G., Branch, J. et al. The New American Urological Association Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Clinical Guidelines: 2019 Update. Curr Urol Rep 21, 32 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-020-00985-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-020-00985-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation