Expert compares Aquablation with TURP for treatment of BPH

In this video, Mohamad Baker Berjaoui, MD, compares Aquablation with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). He is an author of the recent BJUI Compass paper, “WATER versus WATER II 5-year update: Comparing Aquablation therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia in 30–80-cm³ and 80–150-cm³ prostates.” Berjaoui is a urology resident at the University of Toronto in Ontario, Canada.

Transcription:

How does Aquablation compare with traditional treatments like TURP in terms of long-term outcomes, complication rates, and quality of life?

Let's say, first, that TURP remains, in the minds of a lot of people, the gold standard treatment, and that's what we compare to. It has a great result, in terms of the IPSS, improving, Qmax, it's durable. Those are good things with TURP. We showed in our paper, that Aquablation has significantly improved, or at least has the same results as TURP in terms of improving the IPSS and Qmax. The main benefit, I guess, for Aquablation over TURP, is the fact that the sexual side effects are much better when compared to TURP; terms of bleeding, the bleeding risk was significantly less. There's no TUR syndrome, and recovery is way faster for the patient. There's no need for the patient to stay in the hospital for CVI or anything like that. Bigger prostates are eligible for Aquablation. [WATER III] is testing prostate even bigger than 150 ccs. Those are the main benefits for Aquablation over TURP. Obviously, the cost remains a big downside for Aquablation when compared with TURP and the wide availability of TURP overall.

This transcript was AI generated and edited by human editors for clarity.