Comparing the clinical efficacy of prostate enucleation by the Millin method and enucleation performed using a holmium laser (HoLEP) with a prostate volume more than 80 cm3

Purpose of the study was to compare of the average long-term results of classical prostate enucleation using the Millin method and enucleation performed using a holmium laser (HoLEP). Patients and methods. This study, conducted on the basis of the Endocrinology Research Center of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, included 100 patients operated on for obstruction of the prostatic part of the urethra over the period 2020–2023. The main indication for surgery was benign prostatic hyperplasia. The selection criterion for patients was a prostate volume of more than 80 cm3. The patients were divided into 2 groups depending on the intervention performed: in the 1st group Millin surgery was performed (n = 50), in group 2n laser enucleation of the prostate was done (n = 50). The data obtained during the operation in the early postoperative period, as well as the results of postoperative follow-up of patients were analyzed. Results. In the mid-term period, 4–6 months after surgery, patients from both groups were observed to improve their condition and reduce complaints of dysuric phenomena. The results were obtained illustrating a shorter inpatient stay for patients who underwent HoLEP (4.3 ± 0.6 days versus 10.0 ± 2.4 during Millin surgery), which is correspondingly associated with a faster recovery after this intervention compared with the classic one. A statistically significant (p-value < 0.05) problem of patients from the HoLEP group was urethral stricture, which occurred in 6 % of the subjects from this group and did not occur in the Millin surgery group. In fact, scarring of the bladder neck was more commonly obserbed (10 % vs. 8 %) in the Millin surgery group. However, these complications were not more than 10 %. As a result of the study, there was no statistically significant effect of using HoLEP on erectile dysfunction in patients, which suggests the potential of this technique for a lower incidence of worsening erectile dysfunction compared with open intervention. Conclusions. HoLEP is a safe method of prostate enucleation, applicable for its large volume, in particular, up to 80 cm3. This procedure is an alternative to classical open surgery, and can be recommended for patients with polymorbidity to reduce the risk of perioperative complications and reduce rehabilitation time. Millin surgery is also a reliable treatment method with high sensitivity to the detection of cellular atypia and a large volume of cytoreduction. The decision on the surgical procedure used must be made individually for each patient.