Incidence of Surgical Reintervention for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Following Prostatic Urethral Lift, Transurethral Resection of the Prostate, and Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate: A TriNetX Analysis

Jacob H Feiertag; Jennifer A Kane; Joseph Y Clark

doi:10.1016/j.euros.2023.11.009

Incidence of Surgical Reintervention for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Following Prostatic Urethral Lift, Transurethral Resection of the Prostate, and Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate: A TriNetX Analysis

Eur Urol Open Sci. 2023 Dec 23:59:63-70. doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.11.009. eCollection 2024 Jan.

Authors

Jacob H Feiertag¹, Jennifer A Kane², Joseph Y Clark²

Affiliations

¹ Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
² Department of Urology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA.

Abstract

Background: Prostatic urethral lift, or UroLift, has gained popularity as a treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Surgical reintervention rates are a reliable indicator for treatment durability.

Objective: The objective of this study was to utilize TriNetX, a third-party database, to investigate the incidence of surgical reintervention following UroLift, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), and photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) procedures for BPH from 2015 to 2018.

Design setting and participants: Male patients aged 18-100 yr diagnosed with BPH were identified in the TriNetX Diamond Network database between January 2015 and December 2018. Cohorts of individuals undergoing their first UroLift procedure were built using Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision codes. TURP and PVP cohorts were built as comparison groups. The cohorts were then queried for subsequent BPH-related procedures.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Reprocedure rates were assessed and descriptive statistics were used.

Results and limitations: The mean age at first-time UroLift was 70.1 ± 9.4 yr (n = 14 343). Cumulative reprocedure rates collected after first-time UroLift included 1 yr after UroLift (5.1%, n = 14 343) and 4 yr after UroLift (16.1%, n = 710), with an average annual increase of +3.6% per year following 1 yr after the procedure. Comparatively, TURP (n = 22 071) and PVP (n = 14 110) had 4-yr reprocedure rates of 7.5% and 7.8%, respectively, during the same timeframe. Limitations include a lack of clinical data and loss of follow-up data outside the Diamond Network.

Conclusions: The reprocedure rate of UroLift at 4 yr is double the rate of TURP and PVP. In appropriately selected patients, UroLift might be a suitable option for those who desire symptomatic relief from BPH with minimal erectile and ejaculatory side effects. However, the risk of secondary surgical intervention should be considered when considering BPH treatments.

Patient summary: We compared the reintervention rates of prostatic urethral lift (PUL), transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), and photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) using the TriNetX database, and have found that the highest reintervention rates were for PUL of 16% at 4 yr of follow-up, compared with about 8% for those who had TURP and PVP. Interestingly, the most common reintervention was the same operation at 1 yr. This has important implications when counseling patients about the durability of these various outlet procedures for BPH.

Keywords: Benign prostatic hyperplasia; Male urologic surgery; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Urethral Lift; Prostatic neoplasm; Reintervention; Transurethral resection of prostate; UroLift.