Effect of biofeedback electrical stimulation combined with HoLEP on surgical outcomes in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia complicated with detrusor underactivity: a retrospective cohort study - Report - MDSpire
Advertisement
Effect of biofeedback electrical stimulation combined with HoLEP on surgical outcomes in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia complicated with detrusor underactivity: a retrospective cohort study
Clinical Report: Impact of Combined Biofeedback Electrical Stimulation and HoLEP
Overview
This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of combining biofeedback electrical stimulation with holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and detrusor underactivity (DUA). Results indicate significant improvements in voiding function, clinical symptoms, and reduced postoperative complications in the intervention group compared to controls.
Background
Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is prevalent among older men, often leading to lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Detrusor underactivity (DUA) complicates BPH treatment, as it can result in poor voiding efficiency despite surgical intervention. Addressing DUA effectively is crucial for improving surgical outcomes and patient quality of life.
Data Highlights
Parameter
Intervention Group
Control Group
P-value
Qmax (mL/s)
14.38 ± 1.47
10.01 ± 0.85
< 0.001
IPSS
10.8 ± 1.9
18.6 ± 2.1
< 0.001
QOL Score
2.1 ± 0.8
3.0 ± 0.6
< 0.001
PVR (mL)
21.8 ± 5.8
40.2 ± 7.5
< 0.001
VE (%)
77.8 ± 6.2
61.9 ± 5.8
< 0.001
Key Findings
Intervention group showed significantly higher Qmax compared to control (14.38 vs. 10.01 mL/s).
IPSS scores were significantly lower in the intervention group (10.8 vs. 18.6).
Quality of Life scores improved more in the intervention group (2.1 vs. 3.0).
Post-void residual volume was significantly reduced in the intervention group (21.8 vs. 40.2 mL).
Lower incidence of urinary tract infections in the intervention group (13.7% vs. 28.6%).
Higher voiding efficiency in the intervention group (77.8% vs. 61.9%).
Clinical Implications
The combination of biofeedback electrical stimulation with HoLEP may enhance surgical outcomes for patients with BPH and DUA, leading to improved voiding function and reduced complications. Clinicians should consider this combined approach in managing patients with these conditions.
Conclusion
Biofeedback electrical stimulation alongside HoLEP offers significant clinical benefits for patients with BPH and DUA, warranting further investigation and potential integration into standard treatment protocols.
