Physician's Perspectives

GreenLight™ after UroLift™: Practice insights from physicians

Headshot of David Robbins, M.D.
David Robbins, M.D.a
Headshot of Ricardo R. Gonzalez, M.D.
Ricardo R. Gonzalez, M.D.b
Headshot of Rahul Mehan, M.D.
Rahul Mehan, M.D.c

Editorial commentary


The sentiments expressed within this article are representative of the opinions and experiences of the respective physicians. Drs. Robbins, Gonzalez and Mehan are Boston Scientific consultants and were compensated. Physician experience and patient responses can and do vary.

Urologists Dr. David Robbins, Dr. Ricardo Gonzalez and Dr. Rahul Mehan provided their perspectives and experiences when using the GreenLight XPS™ Laser Therapy System for patients requiring further intervention following a UroLift™ procedure.

The UroLift System is commonly used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and involves the use of implants to hold open the obstructed pathway blocking urine flow. UroLift offers rapid and significant improvements in symptoms, urinary flow and quality of life sustained through five years, and patients can preserve sexual function.1 UroLift is indicated for the treatment of symptoms due to urinary outflow obstruction secondary to BPH, including lateral and median lobe hyperplasia, in men 45 years of age or older. It is contraindicated for patients with a prostate volume of >100 cc. The American Urological Association (AUA) Guidelines recommend UroLift for patients with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS)/BPH with prostate volume 30–80 cc and verified absence of an obstructive middle lobe.2 In some cases, patients experience a reoccurrence of symptoms and require further treatment to manage their BPH. In the pivotal trial, UroLift patients had a 13.6% surgical retreatment rate and 10.7% medical retreatment rate at five years.1

Therapy with GreenLight is proven to effectively and safely treat a broad spectrum of BPH patients, including those at high risk (e.g., larger prostate, older age, greater comorbidities) and on anti-coagulants, while providing long-term durability, reduced bleeding, and shorter hospitalization and catheter times as compared to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).3–5 GreenLight provides durable results and symptom relief for patients.6

According to the Instructions for Use for both devices, following are important considerations for both treatments:

Q&A with Dr. Mehan and Dr. Robbins

Conclusion

The participating urologists agree that GreenLight can be a tool of choice for treating patients who may need reintervention following UroLift due to the versatility and durability of the therapy while also providing enhanced outcomes for patients.3

A step-by-step overview of using GreenLight to treat UroLift patients

Dr. Ricardo R. Gonzalez

UroLift clips embedded in prostatic tissue

Images provided courtesy of Dr. Ricardo Gonzalez.

OR camera zoomed into prostate.
4 individual shots of an OR camera zoomed into prostate.
4 individual shots of an OR camera zoomed into prostate.
OR camera zoomed into prostate.
Tissue extracted from a Urolift procedure.

Related content

Be the first to know.

Stay up-to-date with the latest editorials from expert physicians.


*Results from different clinical investigations are not directly comparable. Information provided for educational purposes only.

aUrological Consultants of Florida, P.A.
bAssociate Professor of Urology, Houston Methodist Hospital. Adjunct Associate Professor of Urology, Texas A&M College of Medicine
cFounder, East Valley Urology Center

References

  1. Roehrborn CG, Barkin J, Gange SN, et al. (2017). Five year results of the prospective randomized controlled prostatic urethral L.I.F.T. study. Can J Urol. 2017 Jun;24(3):8802–13.
  2. Lerner LB, McVary, KT, Barry MJ, et al.: Management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia: AUA Guideline part I, initial work-up and medical management. J Urol. 2021 Oct;206(4):806–17.
  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 Jan;69(1):94–102.
  4. Lai S, Peng P, Diao T, et al. Comparison of photoselective green light laser vaporisation versus traditional transurethral resection for benign prostate hyperplasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and prospective studies. BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 21;9(8):e028855.
  5. Rajih E, Tholomier C, Hueber PA, et al. Evaluation of surgical outcomes with photoselective GreenLight XPS laser vaporization of the prostate in high medical risk men with benign prostatic enlargement: a multicenter study. J Endourol. 2017 Jul;31(7):686–93.
  6. Bachmann A, Tubaro A, Barber N, et al. 180-W XPS 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 randomised trial—the GOLIATH study. Eur Urol. 2014 May;65(5):931–42.
  7. GreenLight Instructions for Use. 
  8. UroLift Instructions for Use: https://f.hubspotusercontent30.net/hubfs/2618738/Brochures_Forms/L00181-01_RevA_UroLift%20_System_UL400_IFU_US.pdf
  9. Abolazm AE, El-Hefnawy AS, Laymon M, et al. Ejaculatory hood sparing versus standard laser photoselective vaporization of the prostate: sexual and urodynamic assessment through a double blinded, randomized trial. J Urol. 2020 Apr;203(4):792–801.
  10. Kini M, Te AE, Kashanian JA, et al. Ejaculatory hood-sparing photoselective vaporization of the prostate vs bipolar button plasma vaporization of the prostate in the surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Endourol. 2020 Mar;34(3):322–9.
  11. Goh AC, Gonzalez RR. Photoselective laser vaporization prostatectomy versus transurethral prostate resection: A cost analysis. J Urol. 2010 Apr;183(4):1469–73.
  12. Cornu JN, Ahyai S, Bachmann A, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic obstruction: an update. Euro Urol. 2015 Jun;67(6):1066–96. 
  13. 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). Update March 2022. https://uroweb.org/guidelines/management-of-non-neurogenic-male-luts
  14. Capitán C, Blázquez C, Martin MD, et al. GreenLight HPS 120-W laser vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia: A randomized clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. Eur Urol. 2011 Oct;60(4):734–9.
  15. 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 Jul;5(4):676–80.

Caution: U.S. Federal law restricts this device to sale by or on the order of a physician.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION: These materials are intended to describe common clinical considerations and procedural steps for the use of referenced technologies but may not be appropriate for every patient or case. Decisions surrounding patient care depend on the physician’s professional judgment in consideration of all available information for the individual case.

Boston Scientific (BSC) does not promote or encourage the use of its devices outside their approved labeling. Case studies are not necessarily representative of clinical outcomes in all cases as individual results may vary.

Results from case studies are not necessarily predictive of results in other cases. Results in other cases may vary.

Results from different clinical investigations are not directly comparable. Information provided for educational purposes only.

For information purposes only. The content of this article/publication is under the sole responsibility of its author/publisher and does not represent the opinion of BSC.

The sentiments expressed within this article are representative of the opinions and experiences of the respective physicians. Drs. Robbins, Gonzalez and Mehan are Boston Scientific consultants and were compensated. Physician experience and patient responses can and do vary.

All images are courtesy of Dr. Gonzalez. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.