AB071. Do we need a new technique to insert a foley catheter just after transurethral surgery of the BPH?

© Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved. Transl Androl Urol, 2016;5(S1) tau.amegroups.com a 120 W GreenLight laser with HoLEP in a small prostate volume. Methods: Patients who underwent PVP or HoLEP surgery for BPH at our institutions were reviewed from May 2009 to December 2014 in this retrospective study. Among them, patients with prostate volumes <40 mL based on preoperative trans-rectal ultrasonography were included in this study. Peri-operative and post-operative parameters— such as International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine volume (PVR), and complications— were compared between the groups. Results: PVP was performed in 176 patients and HoLEP in162 patients. Preoperative demographic data were similar in both groups, with the exception of PVR. Operative time and catheter duration did not show significant difference. Significant improvements compared to preoperative values were verified at the postoperative evaluation in both groups in terms of IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and PVR. Comparison of the postoperative parameters between the PVP and HoLEP groups demonstrated no significant difference, with the exception of IPSS voiding subscore at one month postoperatively (5.9 vs. 3.8, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the two groups. Conclusions: Our data suggest that PVP and HoLEP are efficient and safe surgical treatment options for patients with small prostate volume.