Three-year follow-up of feedback microwave thermotherapy versus TURP for clinical BPH: A prospective randomized multicenter study
(2004) In Urology 64(4). p.698-702- Abstract
- Objectives. To compare, in a prospective randomized multicenter study, the efficacy and safety of transurethral microwave thermotherapy with Prostalund Feedback Treatment (PLFT), using the CoreTherm device, with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) 36 months after treatment. Methods. The study was conducted at 10 centers in the United States and Scandinavia. A total of 154 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to PLFT or TURP in a 2:1 ratio. The treatment outcome was evaluated on the basis of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the quality-of-life question (QOL) of the IPSS, peak urinary flow rate (Qmax), urodynamics, and adverse events. The microwave power and treatment time were adjusted... (More)
- Objectives. To compare, in a prospective randomized multicenter study, the efficacy and safety of transurethral microwave thermotherapy with Prostalund Feedback Treatment (PLFT), using the CoreTherm device, with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) 36 months after treatment. Methods. The study was conducted at 10 centers in the United States and Scandinavia. A total of 154 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to PLFT or TURP in a 2:1 ratio. The treatment outcome was evaluated on the basis of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the quality-of-life question (QOL) of the IPSS, peak urinary flow rate (Qmax), urodynamics, and adverse events. The microwave power and treatment time were adjusted according to each patient's response to the supplied energy (ie, the intraprostatic temperature guided the PLFT). Results. Statistically significant improvements in both the TURP and the PLFT groups were observed for IPSS, QOL, and Qmax at 36 months. The average value for the PLFT group was 8.2, 1.2, and 11.9 mL/s for IPSS, QOL, and Qmax, respectively. The corresponding values for the TURP group were IPSS 5.0, QOL 1.0, and Qmax 13.5 mUs. The difference in IPSS outcome was statistically significant; however, no statistically significant differences were found in QOL or Qmax between the two treatment groups. The degree of improvement was in the same range as that observed after 12 and 24 months for both groups. During the 12 to 36-month period, the most frequent adverse events in the TURP group were impotence (15%), micturition urgency (13%), and urethral disorder (8%); in the PLFT group, impotence (8%), prostate-specific antigen increase (5%), and hematuria (4%) were the most common. Conclusions. The clinical outcome 3 years after microwave thermotherapy with PLFT was comparable to the results seen after TURP. The safety of PLFT compared favorably to that of TURP in this study. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/259981
- author
- organization
- publishing date
- 2004
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Urology
- volume
- 64
- issue
- 4
- pages
- 698 - 702
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000224680300020
- pmid:15491704
- scopus:7444243758
- ISSN
- 1527-9995
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.urology.2004.05.030
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 1d4fb426-a5b6-49ce-bfc8-df388163c133 (old id 259981)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 11:55:30
- date last changed
- 2022-04-28 22:01:20
@article{1d4fb426-a5b6-49ce-bfc8-df388163c133,
abstract = {{Objectives. To compare, in a prospective randomized multicenter study, the efficacy and safety of transurethral microwave thermotherapy with Prostalund Feedback Treatment (PLFT), using the CoreTherm device, with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) 36 months after treatment. Methods. The study was conducted at 10 centers in the United States and Scandinavia. A total of 154 patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to PLFT or TURP in a 2:1 ratio. The treatment outcome was evaluated on the basis of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the quality-of-life question (QOL) of the IPSS, peak urinary flow rate (Qmax), urodynamics, and adverse events. The microwave power and treatment time were adjusted according to each patient's response to the supplied energy (ie, the intraprostatic temperature guided the PLFT). Results. Statistically significant improvements in both the TURP and the PLFT groups were observed for IPSS, QOL, and Qmax at 36 months. The average value for the PLFT group was 8.2, 1.2, and 11.9 mL/s for IPSS, QOL, and Qmax, respectively. The corresponding values for the TURP group were IPSS 5.0, QOL 1.0, and Qmax 13.5 mUs. The difference in IPSS outcome was statistically significant; however, no statistically significant differences were found in QOL or Qmax between the two treatment groups. The degree of improvement was in the same range as that observed after 12 and 24 months for both groups. During the 12 to 36-month period, the most frequent adverse events in the TURP group were impotence (15%), micturition urgency (13%), and urethral disorder (8%); in the PLFT group, impotence (8%), prostate-specific antigen increase (5%), and hematuria (4%) were the most common. Conclusions. The clinical outcome 3 years after microwave thermotherapy with PLFT was comparable to the results seen after TURP. The safety of PLFT compared favorably to that of TURP in this study.}},
author = {{Wagrell, L and Schelin, S and Nordling, J and Richthoff, J and Magnusson, B and Schain, M and Larson, T and Boyle, E and Duelund, J and Kroyer, K and Ageheim, H and Mattiasson, Anders}},
issn = {{1527-9995}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{4}},
pages = {{698--702}},
publisher = {{Elsevier}},
series = {{Urology}},
title = {{Three-year follow-up of feedback microwave thermotherapy versus TURP for clinical BPH: A prospective randomized multicenter study}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2004.05.030}},
doi = {{10.1016/j.urology.2004.05.030}},
volume = {{64}},
year = {{2004}},
}