Here’s a table comparing the pros and cons of various treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH):
Treatment | Pros | Cons |
---|---|---|
Medication (Alpha-blockers, 5α-reductase inhibitors) | - Non-invasive - Can be effective for mild to moderate symptoms | - Potential side effects (dizziness, decreased energy, sexual dysfunction) - May not be effective for severe cases - Ongoing cost |
Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE) | - Minimally invasive - Preserves sexual function - Also effective for larger prostate sizes - Can be done in an office setting | - New procedure with limited patient and physician awareness - Not Performed by a Urologist like other treatments - Patients will have to go to an Interventional Radiologist |
Laser Focal Therapy (LFT) |
- Minimally invasive - Low blood loss - Low risk of retrograde ejaculation - Real-time image guidance |
- Requires general anesthesia - May not be suitable for very large prostates |
TULSA-PRO | - Minimally invasive - Real-time image guidance - Preserves prostatic urethra | - Requires general anesthesia - Limited long-term data |
Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) | - Effective for moderate to severe symptoms - Well-established procedure | - Risk of bleeding - Higher risk of retrograde ejaculation - Requires hospital stay |
UroLift | - Minimally invasive - Preserves sexual function - Can be done in an office setting | - May not be suitable for very large prostates - Potential for device migration |
Rezum | - Minimally invasive - Preserves sexual function - Short procedure time | - Requires catheter for 3-5 days post-procedure - Initial discomfort and potential blood in urine/semen - Not suitable for all prostate sizes |
Transurethral Microwave Therapy (TUMT) | - Noninvasive - Can be done in an office setting | - May not be as effective as surgical options - Potential for urinary retention |
Simple Prostatectomy | - Effective for very large prostates | - Most invasive option - Longer recovery time - Higher risk of complications |