dc.contributor.author | Rodríguez Socarrás, Moisés | |
dc.contributor.author | Fernández Del Álamo, Julio | |
dc.contributor.author | Espósito, Fabio | |
dc.contributor.author | Reinoso Elbers, Javier | |
dc.contributor.author | Carrión Monsalve, Diego | |
dc.contributor.author | Gómez Rivas, Juan | |
dc.contributor.author | Greco, Isabella | |
dc.contributor.author | Llanes González, Luis | |
dc.contributor.author | Cuadros Rivera, Vanesa | |
dc.contributor.author | Gómez Sancha, Fernando | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-01-05T12:25:30Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-01-05T12:25:30Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1433-8726 | spa |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10641/3655 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background and purpose: We aimed to describe the technique and outcomes of En-Bloc MOSES laser enucleation of the prostate (En-Bloc MoLEP) with early apical release comparing it to En-Bloc HoLEP (non-MOSES).
Patients and methods: This is a single-arm prospective study, using a historical control. n = 80 patients were enrolled to the En Bloc MoLEP group and compared to a retrospective group of n = 137 patients treated by En Bloc HoLEP (non-MOSES), in total n = 217 patients.
Results: En-Bloc MoLEP, showed to significantly improve the surgical time by 32% compared to non-MOSES HoLEP (32.16 ± 14.46 min, 47.58 ± 21.32, respectively; P = 0.003). Enucleation time, ablation rate and hemostasis time were also significantly improved (P < 0.001, for all three parameters). Enucleation time was 22.10 ± 9.27 min and 31.46 ± 14.85 min (P < 0.001), ablation rate 4.11 ± 2.41 and 2.54 ± 1.31 gr/min (P < 0.001), Hemostasis time 3.01 ± 2.50 and 8.35 ± 5.38 min (P < 0.001), for En Bloc MoLEP and En Bloc HoLEP, respectively. Q-max, PVR, PSA and IPSS showed significant improvement, however, at 12 months no significant differences were observed comparing both groups.
Conclusions: En-Bloc MoLEP was significantly better than En-Bloc HoLEP in terms of surgical time, enucleation time, ablation rate and hemostasis time. However, large comparative RCT with long-term follow-up are needed. | spa |
dc.language.iso | eng | spa |
dc.publisher | World Journal of Urology | spa |
dc.rights | Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/ | * |
dc.subject | BPE | spa |
dc.subject | BPH | spa |
dc.subject | HoLEP | spa |
dc.subject | Holmium | spa |
dc.subject | Laser | spa |
dc.subject | MOSES | spa |
dc.subject | MoLEP | spa |
dc.subject | Prostate hyperplasia | spa |
dc.title | En Bloc enucleation with early apical release technique using MOSES (En Bloc MoLEP) vs. classic En Bloc HoLEP: a single arm study comparing intra- and postoperative outcomes. | spa |
dc.type | journal article | spa |
dc.type.hasVersion | AO | spa |
dc.rights.accessRights | open access | spa |
dc.description.extent | 2,39 MB | spa |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s00345-022-04205-x | spa |
dc.relation.publisherversion | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00345-022-04205-x | spa |