Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 30, 2025

Surgical Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate HoLEP.
Published on: March 6, 2018
MOSES™ Technology vs Non-Moses Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: A Randomized Controlled Trial From a
Zhen Tong1, Sherryn Sherryn2, Shengqiang Xia1
1Department of Urology, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Objective:
Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) management has evolved from transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP). Recent innovation introduces Moses™ technology in holmium lasers, with the Lumenis Pulse™ system.
Methods:
To compare Moses-augmented HoLEP (MoLEP) to non-Moses HoLEP in terms of enucleation efficiency, hemostasis, and applicability in day surgery settings. A single-blind, prospective, parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted in Shanghai, China, from March to December 2022. Ethical approval (SK2020-038) was obtained, and 100 consenting men over 50 with BPH indications were randomized (1:1) into MoLEP and HoLEP groups. Surgical procedures were standardized, and outcomes were assessed by blinded analysts.
Results:
Data from 80 participants (38 MoLEP, 42 HoLEP) were analyzed. Baseline characteristics were comparable. MoLEP demonstrated superior enucleation efficiency (3.5±0.8 g/min) and shorter enucleation time (22.5±7.6 minutes) compared to HoLEP, although not statistically significant. MoLEP achieved hemostasis in less time (6.6±4.2 minutes) than HoLEP (11.2±5.1 minutes). Postoperative care demands varied, with MoLEP requiring less bladder irrigation. MoLEP exhibited a shorter average catheterization time (1.3±0.1 days) and reduced hospitalization compared to HoLEP. Both groups showed significant postoperative improvements in functional outcomes.
Conclusion:
While statistical significance was not achieved in certain outcome measures, MoLEP exhibited potential advantages in postoperative care demands, shorter catheterization time, and reduced hospitalization, suggesting its feasibility and safety in day surgery settings. Postoperative functional outcomes improved significantly in both groups.

