STI Volume 32



Surgical Technology International


32nd Edition


New Online Studies


Online First - April, 2018



1 year Institutional Subscription 

both electronic and print versions



Laser Photoselective-Vaporization of the Prostate by GreenLight XPS™ Laser: Is It Really an Endourological Joker Card?
Jamil Ghahhari, MD, Urology Resident, Carlo D’Orta, MD, Urology Resident, Ambra Rizzoli, MD, Urology Resident, Michele Marchioni, MD, Urology Resident, Giulia Primiceri, MD, Urology Resident, Piergustavo De Francesco, MD, Urology Resident, Angelo Civitella, MD, Urology Resident, Mario Di Lecce, MD, Urology resident, Pietro Castellan, MD, Consultant in Urology, Roberto Castellucci, MD, Consultant in Urology, Department of Urology, SS. Annunziata Hospital, “G.D’Annunzio” University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy, Fabio Neri, MD, Consultant in Urology, Fabiola Raffaella Tamburro, MD, Consultant in Urology, Luca Cindolo MD, FEBU, PhD, Consultant in Urology, Department of Urology, “S. Pio da Pietrelcina” Hospital, Vasto, Italy, Luigi Schips, MD, Professor, Director, Department of Urology, SS. Annunziata Hospital, “G.D’Annunzio” University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy



Introduction: In our study, we reported on our monocenter experience with GreenLight (GL) Xcelerated Performance System (XPS)™ /MoXy™ laser fiber (American Medical Systems Inc., Minnetonka, Minnesota), examining its efficacy, safety, and its ability to effectively treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in benign prostate obstruction (BPO). We also explored and compared the three different endoscopic approaches used for GL treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), standard photovaporization (PVP), anatomical PVP, and GreenLight XPS™ enucleation of the prostate.
Materials and Methods: Between February 2013 and April 2017, 140 patients, with an average age of 67.7 years (range 47–85), were treated using the XPS™/MoXy™ system in a single-operative urologic center. The data were retrospectively analyzed with an assessment of the main intra- and postoperative outcomes at three, six, 12, and 18 months comparing both subjective (international prostate symptom score [IPSS]) and objective (uroflow [Qmax] parameters and prostate volume) parameters to the preoperative data. Patients underwent standard PVP, anatomical PVP, or prostate photo-selective en-bloc enucleation (PEBE) according to surgeon preferences.
Results: Median prostate volume (MPV) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) were 69cc and 3.24 ng/dl, respectively. An indwelling catheter, at the time of surgery, was observed in 15% of men. Median operative-laser time and energy applied were 56.4 minutes, 26.5 minutes, and 245813 kJ. Outpatient surgery was feasible with median length of stay at 48 hours. Significant improvement in IPSS and Qmax are observed at all endpoints. No significant intraoperative complications were reported. When stratifying postoperative complications according to the Cavien-Dindo classification, only two cases of high-degree emerged (grades III-IV).
Conclusion: Our data confirm that in treating men with symptomatic benign prostate disease, the GreenLight XPS™/MoXy™ laser fiber is safe and able to achieve challenging results in terms of clinical outcomes and prostate volume reduction. Balance between functional outcomes and complications was great without statistically significant differences, in terms of outcomes, between the different surgical techniques.


Order Digital ePrint:

PDF Format - $89.00


1 Year Subscription

including this article:

Online PDF - $399.00