Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer

Comparison on the efficacy and safety of bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate (B-TUVP) with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (B-TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial

  • Made Adi Wiratama ,
  • Dimas Panca Andhika ,
  • Chi-Fai Ng ,
  • Lukman Hakim ,


Link of Video Abstract:


Background: Bipolar Transurethral Vaporization of the Prostate (B-TUVP) is a surgical technique for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) patients that known for its technical reliability, short operating time, and low risk of intraoperative bleeding. However, despite these advantages, it appears to be an unpopular choice among urologists. Previous studies have produced conflicting results when comparing B-TUVP to Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP), particularly bipolar TURP (B-TURP). To date, no studies have directly compared the efficacy and complications of B-TUVP and B-TURP, which using the same energy type. Therefore, the objective of this study is to compare the efficacy and potential complications of these two modalities for the treatment of BPH.

Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) were followed to perform a systematic search in six databases. The risk of bias in RCT was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) tool version 2. The Review Manager® 5.4 software was used for analyzing all the data.

Results: Six eligible RCTs were included with a total of 940 samples. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), fastest flow rate (Qmax), and post void residual (PVR) were not significantly different, while the quality of life (QoL) score (SMD = -0.64; 95%CI = -1.09 – -0.18; I2 = 86%) were significantly lower in B-TUVP (p < 0.05).  Hemoglobin drop (SMD = -2.05; 95%CI = -2.78 – -1.31; I2 = 95%), catheterization period (SMD = -1.14; 95%CI = -1.45 – -0.84; I2 = 60%), and hospital stay (SMD = -0.68; 95%CI = -1.04 – -0.31; I2 = 61%) were significantly lower in B-TUVP (p < 0.05). The analysis of complications did not differ significantly between the B-TUVP and B-TURP groups.

Conclusion: B-TUVP had similar short- to medium-term efficacy and complications as B-TURP, with advantages in terms of significantly better QoL score, lower hemoglobin drop, shorter catheterization period and hospital stay.


  1. Madersbacher S, Sampson N, Culig Z. Pathophysiology of benign prostatic hyperplasia and benign prostatic enlargement: A mini-review. Gerontology. 2019;65(5):458-464. doi:10.1159/000496289
  2. Roehrborn CG. Pathology of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Int J Impot Res. 2008;20(S11-18). doi:10.1038/IJIR.2008.55
  3. Gravas S, Cornu J, Gacci M, et al. EAU Guidelines on management of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), Incl. Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO). European Association of Urology; 2022.
  4. Mayer EK, Kroeze SGC, Chopra S, Bottle A, Patel A. Examining the “gold standard”: A comparative critical analysis of three consecutive decades of monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) outcomes. BJU Int. 2012;110(11):1595-1601. doi:10.1111/J.1464-410X.2012.11119.X
  5. Omar MI, Lam TB, Alexander CE, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of bipolar compared with monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). BJU Int. 2014;113(1):24-35. doi:10.1111/BJU.12281
  6. Bucuras V, Bardan R. Bipolar vaporization of the prostate: Is it ready for the primetime? Ther Adv Urol. 2011;3(6):257. doi:10.1177/1756287211425683
  7. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery. 2021;88:105906. doi:10.1016/J.IJSU.2021.105906
  8. Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: A Revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. BMJ. 2019;366. doi:10.1136/BMJ.L4898
  9. Geavlete B, Georgescu D, Multescu R, Stanescu F, Jecu M, Geavlete P. Bipolar plasma vaporization vs monopolar and bipolar TURP - A prospective, randomized, long-term comparison. Urology. 2011;78(4):930-935. doi:10.1016/J.UROLOGY.2011.03.072
  10. Geavlete B, Bulai C, Ene C, Checherita I, Geavlete P. Bipolar vaporization, resection, and enucleation versus open prostatectomy: Optimal treatment alternatives in large prostate cases? J Endourol. 2015;29(3):323-331. doi:10.1089/END.2014.0493
  11. Falahatkar S, Mokhtari G, Moghaddam KG, et al. Bipolar transurethral vaporization: A superior procedure in benign prostatic hyperplasia: A prospective randomized comparison with bipolar TURP. Int Braz J Urol. 2014;40(3):346-355. doi:10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2014.03.08
  12. Karadag MA, Cecen K, Demir A, Kocaaslan R, Altunrende F. Plasmakinetic vaporization versus plasmakinetic resection to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia: A prospective randomized trial with 1 year follow-up. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(9-10):e595-9. doi:10.5489/cuaj.1902
  13. Abdelwahab O, Habous M, Aziz M, et al. Bipolar vaporization of the prostate may cause higher complication rates compared to bipolar loop resection: A randomized prospective trial. Int Urol Nephrol. 2019;51(12):2143-2148. doi:10.1007/S11255-019-02280-5
  14. Abuelazayem T, Salah E, Badr M. Bipolar transurethral resection (B-TURP) versus vaporization (B-TUVP) in management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Int J Curr Res Med Sci. 2019;5(8):7-20.
  15. Young MJ, Elmussareh M, Morrison T, Wilson JR. The changing practice of transurethral resection of the prostate. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2018;100(4):326. doi:10.1308/RCSANN.2018.0054
  16. Badlani GH. Alternatives to TURP: Consider these variables. Urology Times Journal. 2020;48(03):5. Accessed March 20, 2023.
  17. Nuhoǧlu B, Balci MBC, Aydin M, et al. The role of bipolar transurethral vaporization in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urol Int. 2011;87(4):400-404. doi:10.1159/000329797
  18. Lee YT, Ryu YW, Lee DM, Park SW, Yum SH, Han JH. Comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of conventional transurethral resection of the prostate, transurethral resection of the prostate in saline (TURIS), and TURIS-plasma vaporization for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: A pilot study. Korean J Urol. 2011;52(11):763-768. doi:10.4111/KJU.2011.52.11.763
  19. Aydogdu O, Karakose A, Atesci YZ. A clinical study comparing BIVAP saline vaporization of the prostate with bipolar TURP: Early complications, physiological changes and postoperative follow-up outcomes. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(7-8):e485-9. doi:10.5489/cuaj.1772
  20. Karakose A. Clinical comparison of two minimal invasive techniques in the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement over 90 ml: BIVAP (richard wolf®) saline vaporization of the prostate vs. Bipolar plasmakinetic TURP. Arch Esp Urol. 2020;73(2):140-146. doi:10.1007/S13238-016-0264-7
  21. Ikuerowo SO, Ogunade AA, Ogunlowo TO, Uzodimma CC, Esho JO. The burden of prolonged indwelling catheter after acute urinary retention in Ikeja – Lagos, Nigeria. BMC Urol. 2007;7:16. doi:10.1186/1471-2490-7-16
  22. Shuai M, Li Y. Indwelling catheter increases the risk of urinary tract infection in total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine. 2021;100(15):e25490. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000025490
  23. Arya S, Langston AH, Chen R, et al. Perspectives on home time and its association with quality of life after inpatient surgery among us veterans. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(1):e2140196-e2140196. doi:10.1001/JAMANETWORKOPEN.2021.40196
  24. Skinner TAA, Leslie RJ, Steele SS, Nickel JC. Randomized, controlled trial of laser vs. bipolar plasma vaporization treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Can Urol Assoc J. 2017;11(6):194. doi:10.5489/CUAJ.4213
  25. Cury J, Coelho RF, Bruschini H, Srougi M. Is the ability to perform transurethral resection of the prostate influenced by the surgeon’s previous experience? Clinics. 2008;63(3):315. doi:10.1590/S1807-59322008000300005
  26. Wroclawski ML, Carneiro A, Amarante RDM, et al. “Button type” bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate compared with standard transurethral resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome studies. BJU Int. 2016;117(4):662-668. doi:10.1111/BJU.13255
  27. Talreja V, Ali A, Saeed S, et al. Trial without catheter after transurethral resection of prostate: Clamp it or not? Scientifica (Cairo). 2016;2016. doi:10.1155/2016/1562153
  28. Riedinger CB, Fantus RJ, Matulewicz RS, Werntz RP, Rodriguez JF, Smith ND. The impact of surgical duration on complications after transurethral resection of the prostate: an analysis of NSQIP data. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2019;22(2):303-308. doi:10.1038/S41391-018-0104-3
  29. Uehara K, Ito H, Takanashi M, et al. Retrospective analysis of second-generation bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate in older patients aged ≥80 years with benign prostate enlargement. Continence. 2022;2:100034. doi:10.1016/J.CONT.2022.100034
  30. Geavlete B, Georgescu D, Multescu R, et al. A long-term, prospective, randomized-controlled comparison of surgical safety and clinical efficiency in medium size bph cases – the evidence-based 8 years’ test of time for the mono- and bipolar turp versus the bipolar plasma vaporization. J Urol. 2019;201(Supplement 4). doi:10.1097/01.JU.0000556282.95904.40
  31. Van den Broeck T, Oprea-Lager D, Moris L, et al. A systematic review of the impact of surgeon and hospital caseload volume on oncological and nononcological outcomes after radical prostatectomy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2021;80(5):531-545. doi:10.1016/J.EURURO.2021.04.028
  32. Duarsa GWK, Lesmana R, Mahadewa TGB. High Serum Prostate Specific Antigen as A Risk Factor for Moderate-Severe Prostate Inflammation in Patient with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Bali Med J. 2015;4(3):148-51. Available from:

How to Cite

Wiratama, M. A., Andhika, D. P. ., Ng, C.-F. ., & Hakim, L. . (2023). Comparison on the efficacy and safety of bipolar transurethral vaporization of the prostate (B-TUVP) with bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate (B-TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial. Bali Medical Journal, 12(2), 1762–1768.




Search Panel