To evaluate the efficacy of low-power (LP) versus high-power (HP) holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), highlighting the clinical significance of this comparison through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Key Findings:
LP-HoLEP is cost-effective and versatile compared to HP-HoLEP, with specific outcomes indicating lower complication rates.
Existing studies on LP-HoLEP are primarily retrospective, limiting the strength of evidence.
The analysis aims to clarify clinical advantages of LP-HoLEP based on RCTs, particularly in postoperative recovery times.
Interpretation:
The findings suggest that LP-HoLEP may be a viable alternative to HP-HoLEP, particularly in terms of cost and adaptability, but further high-quality prospective studies are needed to confirm its efficacy and its implications for clinical practice.
Limitations:
Most studies included in the analysis are retrospective, which weakens the reliability of findings and may introduce biases.
Limited availability of prospective comparative studies or RCTs on LP-HoLEP.
Conclusion:
LP-HoLEP presents a promising alternative to HP-HoLEP for the treatment of BPH, but further research is necessary to establish its efficacy and safety definitively, emphasizing the need for high-quality prospective studies.
