placeholder

Treat patients, not prostates

Versatile therapy options for optimal BPH patient care

A versatile portfolio that can meet your patients’ needs1-7

While many BPH patients share certain characteristics, each one has a unique set of traits and needs. Each person has hopes and concerns related to the treatment.​

​Each individual has different priorities in improving their current quality of life. Conversations about patients’ priorities are important but may also be challenging. ​

  • Preserve sexual function​

  • High-risk patients​

  • Large gland​

  • Median lobe presence​

  • Long-term catheter​

  • Retention​

 ​
The tools below have been designed to facilitate communication and support you in building an open and trusting relationship.

Discuss the available options

A comprehensive, yet succinct overview of BPH treatments – from watchful waiting and daily medication, to minimally invasive therapies and surgical procedures.

Make the appropriate choice

A decision-making flow chart by Dr Kaplan and Dr Rieken to help narrow down the options and guide treatment selection, based on common patient considerations.

Are you looking for a treatment that provides durable BPH symptom relief with sustained quality of life (QoL) benefits? 8-14

From water vapour to laser, the versatile therapies of the Boston Scientific BPH portfolio have complementary capabilities.​

​They also offer technical agility, allowing you to adapt to your patient’s needs and reach a shared treatment decision based on their prostate anatomy and potential clinical comorbidities.​

​So far, over a million patients have been treated with the Boston Scientific BPH treatment portfolio across clinical trials, observational studies, and clinical practice.3,7-11,15-17​

​The short hospital stay and overall cost saving provided by our portfolio can also aid in efficient resource management for hospitals.10,16,18,19

Explore our BPH podcasts series

How can we help you?

1.McVary KT, Gange SN, Gittelman MC, et al. Minimally Invasive Prostate Convective Water Vapor Energy Ablation: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Study for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. J Urol. 2016;195(5):1529–1538.
2. 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;126:171–179.
3. Thomas JA, Tubaro A, Barber N, et al. A Multicenter Randomized Noninferiority Trial Comparing GreenLight-XPS Laser Vaporization of the Prostate and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Obstruction: Two-yr Outcomes of the GOLIATH Study. Eur Urol. 2016;69(1):94–102.
4. Sohn JH, Choi YS, Kim SJ, et al. Effectiveness and Safety of Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate with the 120 W HPS Greenlight Laser in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patients Taking Oral Anticoagulants. Korean J Urol. 2011;52(3):178–83.
5. Foster HE, Barry MJ, Dahm P, et al. Surgical Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Attributed to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2018;200(3):612–619.
6. Gravas S, Cornu JN, Gacci M, et al. EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), incl. Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO). Available at:https://uroweb.org/guidelines/management-of-non-neurogenic-male-luts [Accessed April 2022].
7. Tan AH, Gilling PJ, Kennett KM, et al. A randomized trial comparing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate with transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands (40 to 200 grams). J Urol. 2003;170(4 Pt 1):1270–
8. McVary KT, Gittelman MC, Goldberg KA, et al. Final 5-Year Outcomes of the Multicenter Randomized Sham-Controlled Trial of a Water Vapor Thermal Therapy for Treatment of Moderate to Severe Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. J Urol. 2021;206(3):715–724.
9. Calves J, Thoulouzan M, Perrouin-Verbe MA, et al. Long-term Patient-reported Clinical Outcomes and Reoperation Rate after Photovaporization with the XPS-180W GreenLight Laser. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5(4):676–680.
10. Kuntz RM, Lehrich K, Ahyai SA. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus open prostatectomy for prostates greater than 100 grams: 5-year follow-up results of a randomised clinical trial. Eur Urol. 2008;53(1):160–6.
11. Whiting D, Penev B, Guest K, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: A single-centre case series of 1000 patients. J Clin Urol. 2021.
12. Malde S, Lam W, Adwin Z, et al. Pharmacological and interventional treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: An evidence-based comparative review. BJUI Compass. 2021;2(4):238–59.
13. Sun I, Yoo S, Park J, et al. Quality of life after photo-selective vaporization and holmium-laser enucleation of the prostate: 5-year outcomes. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):8261.
14. Gilling PJ, Aho TF, Frampton CM, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: results at 6 years. Eur Urol. 2008;53(4):744–9.
15. Data on File with Boston Scientific.
16. Bachmann A, Tubaro A, Barber N, et al. 180-WXPS GreenLight Laser Vaporization Versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Obstruction: 6-Month Safety and Efficacy Results of a European Multicentre Randomized Trial -The GOLIATH Study. Eur Urol. 2014;65(5):931–42.
17. Bachmann A, Tubaro A, Barber N, et al. A European Multicenter Randomized Non-inferiority Trial Comparing 180-W GreenLight-XPS Laser Vaporization and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Obstruction: 12 Month Results of the GOLIATH-Study. J Urol. 2015;193(2):570–8.
18. Ulchaker JC, Martinson MS. Cost-effectiveness analysis of six therapies for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2017;10:29–43.
19. Goh AC, Gonzalez RR. Photoselective laser vaporization prostatectomy versus transurethral prostate resection: a cost analysis. J Urol. 2010;183(4):1469–73.

CE0844