Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 42608940

Aquablation/AquaBeam Waterjet Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Three-Year Functional and Ejaculatory Outcomes in a Multicenter Real-World Italian Cohort.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the 3-year functional outcomes of Aquablation/AquaBeam waterjet therapy for bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), with particular attention to urinary symptoms, quality of life, continence, ejaculatory function, and complications. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained multicenter database including 218 consecutive men who underwent Aquablation/AquaBeam for symptomatic BPH between January 2019 and January 2022 at three referral centers. Functional outcomes assessed preoperatively and during follow-up included International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS quality-of-life item (IPSS-QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine (PVR), continence, and ejaculatory function. Median follow-up was 36 months. Ejaculatory preservation was evaluated only in patients with preserved antegrade ejaculation at baseline. RESULTS: Median age was 61 years (IQR 57-66), median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 2.52 ng/mL (IQR 0.40-21.60), and median prostate volume was 55 mL (IQR 40-73). Median operative time was 56 min, while median catheterization time and length of hospital stay were both 48 h. Functional improvements were evident from the 3-month follow-up and remained stable through 36 months. At 36 months, median IPSS improved to 5 and median Qmax to 18 mL/s. Median PSA changed modestly from 2.52 ng/mL at baseline to 2.75 ng/mL at 36 months. No cases of de novo urinary incontinence were observed throughout follow-up. Among patients with preserved antegrade ejaculation at baseline, 87% maintained antegrade ejaculation at 36 months. Most postoperative complications were minor (Clavien-Dindo grade I-II, 20.2%). One grade III rectal injury occurred (0.5%). Median hemoglobin decreased from 15.2 g/dL preoperatively to 14.0 g/dL before hospital discharge, and two patients required blood transfusion. During the 36-month follow-up, no surgical retreatment was required, whereas 11 patients (5.0%) received temporary medical retreatment. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter real-world cohort, Aquablation/AquaBeam was safe and effective over 3 years, providing durable improvement in lower urinary tract symptoms and quality of life while preserving continence and antegrade ejaculation in most patients. These findings support Aquablation/AquaBeam as a valuable minimally invasive surgical option for selected men with BPH, particularly those who prioritize preservation of ejaculatory function. Longer-term and comparative studies are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: 48281.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Angelo Porreca, Daniele D'Agostino, Davide De Marchi, Marco Giampaoli, Filippo Marino, Gian Maria Busetto, Antonio Amodeo, Paolo Corsi, Francesco Claps, Luca Di Gianfrancesco. 2026. Aquablation/AquaBeam Waterjet Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Three-Year Functional and Ejaculatory Outcomes in a Multicenter Real-World Italian Cohort.. https://doi.org/10.1111/luts.70088

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Translational reprogramming of TGF-β signaling via TRMT61A-mediated tRNA m1A drives prostatic fibrosis and hyperplasia.

Dysregulation of the epitranscriptomic landscape is closely linked to pathological proliferation, but its specific role in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) remains unclear. Here, we identify the tRNA methyltransferase TRMT61A as a critical driver of BPH progression. We found that TRMT61A and global N1-methyladenosine (m1A) levels are aberrantly upregulated in human BPH tissues. Functionally, TRMT61A knockdown potently suppresses prostate cell proliferation and reduces stromal fibrosis, inducing G1 cell cycle arrest and reversing pathological remodeling both in vitro and in vivo. By integrating ribosome profiling (Ribo-seq) and tRNA-seq, we observed that TRMT61A drives translational reprogramming. TRMT61A preserves the stability of specific tRNA isoacceptors (e.g., tRNA-Leu-CAA), which is required for the efficient decoding of mRNAs containing m1A-dependent codons. Consequently, TRMT61A selectively promotes the translational elongation of the key receptor TGFβR1. This amplifies downstream TGF-β/SMAD signaling and drives epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) without affecting mRNA transcription. In summary, our study reveals how TRMT61A drives BPH progression through TGFβR1 translation, highlighting the therapeutic potential of targeting epitranscriptomic pathways to reverse prostatic hyperplasia and fibrosis.

Male

Prostate morcellation devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and efficiency.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the efficiency and safety of different prostate morcellators used during prostate enucleation for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses guidelines. PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between October 2012 and May 2025. Studies reporting clinical outcomes of morcellators used during prostate enucleation were included. Primary outcome was morcellation efficiency (g/min). Secondary outcomes included intraoperative complications, device malfunction, and cost when available. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I), RoB 2 tool, and European Association of Urology case-series criteria. Random-effects meta-analyses and multilevel meta-regression adjusted for prostate volume were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies comprising 5980 patients were included, most undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. The most frequently evaluated devices were the Piranha™ (Richard Wolf GmbH, Knittlingen, Germany) and Lumenis VersaCut™ (Lumenis Ltd., Yokneam, Israel; 12 and 13 studies, respectively), followed by DrillCut™ (Karl Storz SE & Co. KG, Tuttlingen, Germany), MultiCut™ (Asclepion Laser Technologies GmbH, Jena, Germany), and Cyber Blade™ (Quanta System SpA, Milan, Italy) systems. Unadjusted weighted mean morcellation efficiency was 7.80 g/min (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.26-9.34 g/min) for Piranha, 4.70 g/min (95% CI 3.61-5.79 g/min) for VersaCut, 5.90 g/min (95% CI 3.16-8.64 g/min) for DrillCut, and 9.59 g/min (95% CI 4.78-14.39 g/min) for MultiCut. In volume-adjusted meta-regression using Piranha as reference, VersaCut remained significantly less efficient (-2.75 g/min; 95% CI -4.58 to -0.92 g/min; P = 0.003), with an even greater difference in prostates >70 mL (-4.34 g/min). Bladder mucosal injury was the most frequently reported complication; however, relatively rare across all devices. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly higher risk with VersaCut compared to Piranha (risk ratio 3.22, 95% CI 1.81-5.71), with low heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides a contemporary clinical benchmark of the efficiency and safety of currently available prostate morcellators. Oscillating blade systems, particularly the Piranha morcellator, demonstrated higher morcellation efficiency and a more favourable safety profile than reciprocating blade devices, with the largest performance differences observed in patients with larger prostates.

Humans

Efficacy and safety of thulium fiber laser versus conventional holmium:YAG laser in anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Anatomical endoscopic enucleation is an established treatment for benign prostatic obstruction. Whether thulium fiber laser enucleation (ThuFLEP) improves outcomes over conventional holmium:YAG laser enucleation (HoLEP) remains uncertain. We compared the efficacy and safety of ThuFLEP versus non-MOSES-modulated HoLEP. METHODS: We performed a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis of randomised and comparative cohort studies comparing ThuFLEP and conventional HoLEP in adult men. Six databases were searched. Outcomes included International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS quality-of-life score, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual volume, hospital stay, and complications. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed with RoB 2/ROBINS-I and GRADE. RESULTS: Seven non-overlapping comparative populations in eight publications included 3,509 patients. ThuFLEP was associated with a small statistically significant reduction in IPSS at 3 months (mean difference [MD] -1.04 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.81 to -0.28) of uncertain clinical relevance. Qmax differences were small and directionally inconsistent across follow-up (favouring HoLEP at 3 months and ThuFLEP at 6 and 12 months) and derived mainly from retrospective cohorts, with neutral randomised subgroups. Stress and urge urinary incontinence were less frequent overall (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96, and RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.68), but both estimates depended on one large registry cohort and were not robust to its exclusion. Most other complications and hospital stay showed no clear between-group difference. Limitations include few studies per outcome, heterogeneity, sparse safety events, inconsistent prostate-specific antigen reporting, and mostly low/very low certainty evidence. CONCLUSION: ThuFLEP and conventional HoLEP are clinically comparable with no definitive superiority of either laser. Platform selection should be individualised according to surgeon expertise, institutional resources, and patient characteristics. Future trials should standardise cost-effectiveness outcomes and investigate whether the distinct laser-tissue interactions impact adenoma clearance, PSA reduction, enucleation completeness, and long-term durability.

Humans