Katz R.a· Ahmed M.S.A.a· Safadi A.a· Roizman S.b· Zisman A.b· Kabha M.c· Dekel Y.c· Baniel J.d· Aharony S.d

Author affiliations

aDepartment of Urology, Ziv Medical Center, Azriell Faculty of Medicine, Bar Ilan University, Safed, Israel
bDepartment of Urology, Shamir Medical Center, Tel Aviv University Faculty of Medicine, Zrifin, Israel
cDepartment of Urology, Carmel Medical Center, Technion Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel
dDepartment of Urology, Rabin Medical Center, Tel Aviv University Faculty of Medicine, Petach Tikva, Israel

Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.

Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Rent via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing of this article Organize, annotate and mark up articles Printing and downloading restrictions apply

Start free trial

Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

Subcription rates

Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: May 08, 2022
Accepted: November 22, 2022
Published online: January 31, 2023

Number of Print Pages: 7
Number of Figures: 5
Number of Tables: 0

ISSN: 0042-1138 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0399 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/UIN

Abstract

Introduction: The Butterfly Prostatic Retraction device is a novel transurethral implant designed to dilate the prostatic urethra and treat lower urinary tract symptoms. We assessed its safety, efficacy and impact on urinary flow, ejaculation, and quality of life. Materials and Methods: We included 64 men, treated for benign prostate hyperplasia for at least 1 year. All patients had Qmax≤ 13 mL/s and IPSS >12. Insertion of the device was performed via cystoscopy. Follow-up visits were performed at 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and included uroflowmetry, IPSS, QoL, and sexual function questionnaires. Cystoscopy was performed on 3 and 12 months. Results: Patients age was 50–83 years. 28 patients completed a 1-year follow-up with an intact device. Mean Qmax improved by 2 mL/s (25%), IPSS median drop was 10 points (40%), and QoL score was 1.5 points (38%). Sexually active patients reported antegrade ejaculation. On cystoscopy, gradual coverage of the devices with urethral mucosa was observed. In 1 patient, the device was repositioned. In 19 patients, the device was removed. 12 patients returned to alpha-blocker therapy and 7 patients underwent TURP. One patient developed a bulbar urethral stricture. Conclusions: We demonstrated feasibility and good tolerability of the Butterfly device.

© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel

References Berry SJ, Coffey DS, Walsh PC, Ewing LL. The development of human benign prostatic hyperplasia with age. J Urol. 1984 Sep;132(3):474–9. Sagnier PP, MacFarlane G, Richard F, Botto H, Teillac P, Boyle P. Results of an epidemiological survey using a modified American urological association symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia in France. J Urol. 1994;151(5):1266–70. Garraway WM, Collins GN, Lee RJ. High prevalence of benign prostatic hypertrophy in the community. Lancet. 1991;338(8765):469–71. Chute CG, Panser LA, Girman CJ, Oesterling JE, Guess HA, Jacobsen SJ, et al. The prevalence of prostatism: a population-based survey of urinary symptoms. J Urol. 1993;150(1):85–9. Staios D, Shergill I, Thwaini A, Junaid I, Buchholz NP. The Memokath stent. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2007 Mar;4(2):99–101. Armitage JN, Rashidian A, Cathcart PJ, Emberton M, van der Meulen JH. The thermo-expandable metallic stent for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2006 Oct;98(4):806–10. Armitage JN, Cathcart PJ, Rashidian A, De Nigris E, Emberton M, van der Meulen JH. Epithelializing stent for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review of the literature. J Urol. 2007;177(5):1619–24. Bozkurt IH, Yalcinkaya F, Sertcelik MN, Zengin K, Ekici M, Yigitbasi O. A good alternative to indwelling catheter owing to benign prostate hyperplasia in elderly: memotherm Prostatic Stent. Urology. 2013 Nov;82(5):1004–7. Yildiz G, Bahouth Z, Halachmi S, Meyer G, Nativ O, Moskovitz B. Allium TPS – A new prostatic stent for the treatment of patients with benign prostatic obstruction: the first report. J Endourol. 2016 Mar;30(3):319–22. Cantwell AL, Bogache WK, Richardson SF, Tutrone RF, Barkin J, Fagelson JE, et al. Multicentre prospective crossover study of the ‘prostatic urethral lift’ for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int. 2014 Apr;113(4):615–22. Chughtai B, Elterman D, Shore N, Gittleman M, Motola J, Pike S, et al. The iTind temporarily implanted nitinol device for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Urology. 2021 Jul;153:270–6. Vjaters E, Nitsan D, Mullerad M, Engelstein D, Leibovitch I, Feld Y. First-in-man safety and efficacy of the ClearRing implant for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol Focus. 2020 Jan 15;6(1):131–6. Egan KB. The epidemiology of benign prostatic hyperplasia associated with lower urinary tract symptoms, prevalence and incident rates. Urol Clin North Am. 2016 Aug;43(3):289–97. Van Asseldonk B, Barkin J, Elterman DS. Medical therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a review. Can J Urol. 2015 Oct;22(Suppl 1):7–17. Kaplan SA. Side effects of alpha-blocker use: retrograde ejaculation. Rev Urol. 2009 Fall;11(Suppl 1):S14–18. Langan RC. Benign prostatic hyperplasia. Prim Care. 2019 Jun;46(2):223–32. Peyton CC, Badlani GH. The management of prostatic obstruction with urethral stents. Can J Urol. 2015 Oct;22(Suppl 1):75–81. Srinivasan A, Wang R. An update on minimally invasive surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia: techniques, risks, and efficacy. World J Mens Health. 2020 Oct;38(4):402–11. Oesterling JE, Kaplan SA, Epstein HB, Defalco AJ, Reddy PK, Chancellor MB. The North American experience with the urolume endoprosthesis as a treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia: long-term results. The North American urolume study group. Urology. 1994 Sep;44(3):353–62. Masood S, Djaladat H, Kouriefs C, Keen M, Palmer JH. The 12-year outcome analysis of an endourethral wallstent for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int. 2004 dec;94(9):1271–4. Armitage JN, Cathcart PJ, Rashidian A, De Nigris E, Emberton M, van der Meulen JH. Epithelializing stent for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review of the literature. J Urol. 2007 May;177(5):1619–24. Perry MJ, Roodhouse AJ, Gidlow AB, Spicer TG, Ellis BW. Thermo-expandable intraprostatic stents in bladder outlet obstruction: an 8-year study. BJU Int. 2002 Aug;90(3):216–23. Sethi K, Bozin M, Jabane T, McMullin R, Cook D, Forsyth R, et al. Thermo-expandable prostatic stents for bladder outlet obstruction in the frail and elderly population: an underutilized procedure? Investig Clin Urol. 2017 Nov;58(6):447–52. Roehrborn CG. Prostatic urethral lift, a unique minimally invasive surgical treatment of male lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urol Clin North Am. 2016 Aug;43(3):357–69. Magistro G, Stief CG, Woo HH. Mini-review: what is new in urolift? Eur Urol Focus. 2018 Jan;4(1):36–9. McVary KT, Rogers T, Roehrborn CG. Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: 4-year results from randomized controlled study. Urology. 2019;126:171–9. Ray AF, Powell J, Speakman MJ, Longford NT, DasGupta R, Bryant T, et al. Efficacy and safety of prostate artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an observational study and propensity-matched comparison with transurethral resection of the prostate (the UK-ROPE study). BJU Int. 2018;122(2):270–82. Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: May 08, 2022
Accepted: November 22, 2022
Published online: January 31, 2023

Number of Print Pages: 7
Number of Figures: 5
Number of Tables: 0

ISSN: 0042-1138 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0399 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/UIN

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.