Electrovaporization of the prostate compared to transurethral resection in the treatment of benign prostatic hypertrophy.

The objectives of this study was to compare electrovaporization (EVAP) of the prostate to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURF). A prospective evaluation of 60 patients treated for benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) was carried out between November 1994 and November 1996. Twenty five patients were treated with TURF and 35 patients with EVAP. All patients had a minimum 12 month follow-up. The results obtained were comparable in terms of surgical procedure timewith a bloodless surgical field using EVAP. EVAP was advantageous in reducing the time with indwelling urinary catheter postoperatively and reducing hospital stay. At 12 month follow-up results of flow rates and symptom scores were similar for both TURF and EVAP. Reoperation rate for residual BPH in the EVAP group was higher than for TURF, suggesting that EVAP should probably be limited to smaller sized glands. This study suggests that EVAP is a viable alternative to TURF in selected patients. It requires no specialized equipment and may allow a reduction in catheterization and hospital stay.