Objective: Although morcellation is a stan-dard procedure of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP), studies on the morcellators used are limited in number. We aimed to compare two different tissue morcellators used in HoLEP, which have similar objectives but differences in efficiency and safety in working principles.
Material and Methods: The data of 130 pa-tients who underwent HoLEP between December 2018 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Sixty-five patients received Lumenis® Versacut (Lumenis Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) morcellator and 65 patients received Hawk® JAWS (Hawk, Minitech Co., China) morcellator after enucleation were included in the study. The effi-ciency of morcellation (g/min), morcellation time (min), total operation time (min), enucleation time (min), enucleated tissue weight (g), the ef-ficiency of enucleation, densities of the removed prostate tissues, perioperative complications asso-ciated with the use of a morcellator were recorded perioperatively.
Results: There was no significant difference in total operation time (min), enucleation time (min), enucleated tissue weight (g), and efficiency of enucleation (g/min) efficiency of morcellation, morcellation time (min) between the two groups. Bladder mucosal damage occurred in 3 patients (4%) in the Versacut group, while mucosal bladder damage was not observed in any patient in the Hawk® JAWS group (p = 0.08).
Conclusion: Hawk® JAWS and Lumenis® VersaCut morcellators were comparable in their efficiency and safety.
Keywords: Hawk, HoLEP, morcellation, morcellator, Versacut.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Although morcellation is a stan-dard procedure of Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP), studies on the morcellators used are limited in number. We aimed to compare two different tissue morcellators used in HoLEP, which have similar objectives but differences in efficiency and safety in working principles.
Material and Methods: The data of 130 pa-tients who underwent HoLEP between December 2018 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Sixty-five patients received Lumenis® Versacut (Lumenis Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) morcellator and 65 patients received Hawk® JAWS (Hawk, Minitech Co., China) morcellator after enucleation were included in the study. The effi-ciency of morcellation (g/min), morcellation time (min), total operation time (min), enucleation time (min), enucleated tissue weight (g), the ef-ficiency of enucleation, densities of the removed prostate tissues, perioperative complications asso-ciated with the use of a morcellator were recorded perioperatively.
Results: There was no significant difference in total operation time (min), enucleation time (min), enucleated tissue weight (g), and efficiency of enucleation (g/min) efficiency of morcellation, morcellation time (min) between the two groups. Bladder mucosal damage occurred in 3 patients (4%) in the Versacut group, while mucosal bladder damage was not observed in any patient in the Hawk® JAWS group (p = 0.08).
Conclusion: Hawk® JAWS and Lumenis® VersaCut morcellators were comparable in their efficiency and safety.
Keywords: Hawk, HoLEP, morcellation, morcellator, Versacut.