Good morning all. I just waited to let everyone know that I just got a e-mail from NeoTract which does Urolift They sent me information on the Urolift with Median Lobe. Average age of the men was 50 with a prostate size of 80 CC At 1 month 65 % had a 80 % improvement. Quality of life score was much better. Qmax improvement range from 95 % to 124 % ...................................................................................................................... Conclusions: Median prostatic lobe obstruction can be treated with PUL implants safely and effectively and is a new FDA indication for this therapy. Also Erectile function stayed the same and ejaculatory function was significantly improved throughout the follow up. If I find out any thing else I will let you all know. Ken
i hear that th eclips they put into the area can not be removed. what happens if the clips have issues later in life?
I had talked to a Urolift rep in CA asking the same question and I also asked my urologist who supposed to do Urolift on me.
My recollection of the answer: the implant consists of 2 metal tabs and a piece of suture, one metal tab is located outside of the prostate and one inside the prostatic urethra. That end of the suture located in the urethra can be cut then the metal tab inside the urethra can be retrieved by a tool (my urologist told me that). Howeve, the metal tab outside of the prostrate and the remaining suture will stay where they are I.e. Inside the body. This is the reason, after Urolift and after removing the tab inside the urethra, one can have HoLEP! Green Light Laser or TURP, etc. as the suture that is left behind will not interfere th subsequent procedure.
Ken may have a different answer for u.
I was told by my doctor and I have read that they can be removed If they have to. Ken I am going to look in my file and see if I can find it
DL & Change.This is what my doctor told me and I did find it in my file from the Urolift site. Something like you said DL It said : Your doctor can remove the Urethral Implant, the suture can be cut and the Urethral end piece can be removed. The capsular tab will remain inside the body. It is made of stainless steel and you will not feel it. If you end up having to have another procedure they will just be cut out when that is done. I never have felt mine no matter what I do. When the grand kids jump on my lap or if I'm at the gym running. Never know they inside..Ken
Thank you for this.. I may be going for a Urolift procedure in September.
Good morning. It is no problem. If you have any question I am here for you. Ken
Ken, I'm looking at the statement "65% had a 80% improvement." That doesn't seem impressive if I'm reading it right. Thanks, Cam
Fantastic procedure, that's the road to go down .
Thanks.. I am seeing my urologist again in early September but last time I saw him, he did a cystoscopy and said I was a good candidate for the procedure.. it is a preferable option to a TURP, which I was offered previously and declined
That was the first phase it was only 21 men by the second month all the men improved. They were just learning. I am looking again for phase 2 & 3 which had more patients. They figure that was not bad for the first try. Each new procedure goes through that...Ken
Cam remember that was only the first month and all men heal at different rates. There is 1 - 3 - 6 and 12 months results. It does get better Ken
Is a cystoscope or a trus what drs use as the main guide for choosing one of the procedures.
Camster I made a mistake. The information is not for the Urolift it is for the first trail for the Aquablation that was done in 2015. I was talking this morning to 2 men One on Urolift and one on Aquablation. My papers got put together. This is for the Urolift . There was a 5 year study show that Urolift procedure is effectively led to a rapid reduction of symptoms while preserving sexual function. Improvement in symptoms and quality of life with a low retreatment rate of 2 % per year. Sorry guys. Ken
Well, mine did a cystoscopy.. but think he did it to also ch co my bladder and urethra again as my last one was done 2 years ago.. we had discussed a Urolift previous to this . He said he would confirm during the cystoscopy whether I was a suitable candidate for the procedure...
Here is the information that I was suppose to put in in the first place. Presence of a Median Lobe has limited treatment. That is why they did this trail Urolift with Median Lobes. This was a random study. Men at to be at least 50 years of age. Prostate volume no more then 80 cc at this time. When compared to the patients without median lobes they respond well at every point. They were checked at 1 - 3 - 6 - 12 months. Quality of life scores were between 80 to 90 %. 89% would recommend the procedure. Also there were no problem with erectile or ejaculatory functions. CONCLUSIONS. Median Lobes can be treated with implants safely. Have a nice day all Ken
Ken,
I talked to Urolift rep today . She said the Urolift procedure for Obstructive median lobe has been done on about 60 people worldwide as of 8-8-2018. She said it is important to distinguish between enlarged median lobe and obstructive enlarged median lobe, a good question for your Urologist. Apparently an enlarged median lobe by itself does not cause failure of Urolift or other procedures unless it is obstructive. I'm not sure if obstructive means the, ball valve effect, but that is probably one of the causes of obstruction.
I called Steven Gange in Salt Lake City, Utah, who appears in a video on the Urolift web site. He has not done it yet but was making a list of patients who want it for his training from Urolift. Apparantly doctors who want training from Urolift have to get a list of patients who want it, and will get it while the training crew, from Urolift, is there .
I also called a Doctor in the California, who is a Urolift Center of Excellence. They have not done the median lobe procedure and had not made a list of patients for the training.
The Urolift rep sent me the following paper:
LBA15
MULTI-CENTER PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF THE PROSTATIC
URETHRAL LIFT FOR OBSTRUCTIVE MEDIAN LOBE: THE
MEDLIFT STUDY, AN EXTENSION OF THE LIFT RANDOMIZED
STUDY
Daniel Rukstalis*, Winston Salem, NC; Douglas Grier, Edmonds, WA;
Sean Stroup, San Diego, CA; Ronald Tutrone, Towson, MD; Euclid De
Souza, Omaha, NE; Sheldon Freedman, Las Vegas, NV;
Richard David, Sherman Oaks, CA; Jed Kamientsky, New York, NY;
Gregg Eure, Virginia Beach, VA
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Presence of an
obstructive median lobe (OML) has historically limited treatment options
for men suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to
benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Recently, the FDA indicated the
Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) for the treatment of OML based on the
results of the MedLift clinical trial (NCT02625545), presented herein.
MedLift was conducted as an FDA Investigational Device Exemption
extension of the LIFT randomized study, studying PUL for lateral lobes
(LL) of the prostate.
METHODS: Inclusion criteria were identical to the L.I.F.T. study
with the exception of requiring an OML: at least 50 years, AUASI ! 13,
peak flow rate (Qmax) " 12 ml/s and prostate volume no greater than
80cc. The primary endpoint was assessed at 6 months, compared to
L.I.F.T. study results, and followed to 12 months with assessment of
LUTS, quality of life, Qmax, and sexual function.
RESULTS: When compared to the lateral lobe only patients, the
OML patients symptoms responded at least as well at every time point.
For the median lobe patients, AUASI change at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months
was at least a 13.5 point improvement and significantly better than
baseline at every time point (p < 0.0001). Quality of life score and BPH
Impact Index were similarly improved (>60% and >70%, respectively at
3, 6, and 12 months). Qmax improvement ranged from 95-124%
throughout follow up. At 1 month, 65% subjects reported !80 on the
Quality of Recovery scale, 80% reported being 00much00 or 00very much
better,00 and 89% would recommend the procedure. There were no reports
of de novo, sustained erectile or ejaculatory dysfunction. Erectile
function as measured by IIEF-5 remained stable and ejaculatory function
(MSHQ-EjD score) was significantly improved throughout follow up
(p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Median prostatic lobe obstruction can be
treated with PUL implants safely and effectively and is a new FDA
indication for this therapy.
Source of Funding: NeoTract, Inc.
Yes I read the same paper And I think it was approved by the FDA in May of this year. It would be nice if you can get in the trails. But I told you my doctor has been doing them for about a year. Good luck. The lady you talk to was her name Barbara that is the one I get e-mail from Good Luck Ken