Benign prostatic hyperplasia surgical re-treatment after prostatic urethral lift A narrative review

Prostatic urethral lift (PUL) accounts for approximately one-quarter of all surgical benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) procedures performed in the U.S. Within five years of a patient's PUL procedure, approximately 1/7 patients will require surgical BPH retreatment. We aimed to highlight the evidence of surgical BPH retreatment modalities after PUL, with a focus on safety, short-term efficacy, durability, and relative costs.

A literature review was performed using PubMed, and an exhaustive review of miscellaneous online resources was completed. The search was limited to English, human studies. Citations of relevant studies were reviewed.

No study has examined the efficacy, safety, or durability of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or repeat PUL in the post-PUL setting. Recently, groups have examined laser enucleation (n=81), water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) (n=5), robotic simple prostatectomy (SP) (n=2), and prostatic artery embolization (PAE) (n=1) in the post-PUL setting. Holmium enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) after PUL appears to be safe and has similar functional outcomes to HoLEP controls. Other treatment modalities examined appear safe but have limited efficacy evidence supporting their use. Photo-selective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) and robotic waterjet treatment (RWT) have no safety or efficacy studies to support their use in the post-PUL setting.

Despite increasing numbers of patients expected to require surgical retreatment after PUL in North America, there is currently limited evidence and a lack of recommendations guiding the evaluation and management of these patients. HoLEP is associated with the strongest evidence to support its use in the post-PUL setting.