To systematically review all clinical trials investigating prostatic urethral lift (PUL), water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT), and temporary implantable nitinol device (TIND), with emphasis on clinical efficacy and complications.
We performed a systematic review of PubMed/Medline database in November 2020 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines.
Of 168 articles identified, 18 met the inclusion criteria. Evidence consisted of few randomized controlled trials, and multiple single-arm prospective and retrospective studies. Among the three modalities, PUL demonstrates rare occurrence of serious complications but higher retreatment rates at short- and long-term follow-up. WVTT offers lower retreatment rates with a similar safety profile. TIND studies report varying rates of retreatment and complications. All technologies offer low rates of erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction, although the risk appears to be highest for WVTT (<10.8%).
Among the emerging technologies introduced to treat BPE, the in-office PUL, WVTT, and TIND systems are valuable additions to the current surgical options. These systems offer unique advantages that should be considered in the shared decision-making process.
In this report, we identified all clinical trials reporting on the efficacy and safety of the in-office prostatic urethral lift (PUL), water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT), and temporary implantable nitinol device (TIND) systems for the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement. We found that PUL and WVTT demonstrate acceptable outcomes in terms of functional improvement, retreatment, and complications. More data with longer follow-up are required to further evaluate TIND, but early results are promising.
Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.