Incontinence Analysis After HoLEP Using 28Fr Versus 22Fr Sheath

28Fr Versus 22Fr HoLEP, A Randomized Controlled Trial Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Urology

The rationale for this study is to assess whether there is a difference in HoLEP outcomes in smaller 22Fr instruments compared to our standard 28Fr sheaths.

This study will be a randomized controlled trial in which patients who meet inclusion criteria will be randomized to one of two groups, HoLEP performed with either 1) 22Fr sheath set or 2) 28Fr sheath set. After HoLEP, data will be analyzed using chi-square test for incontinence vs no incontinence between 22Fr and 28Fr groups at 1 week, 4 weeks and 12 weeks post operatively.

We hypothesize there will be lower rates of immediate urinary incontinence, and urethral stricture formation in patients undergoing HoLEP with smaller 22Fr sheaths compared to 28 Fr.

This study will be a randomized controlled trial in which patients who meet inclusion criteria will be randomized to one of two groups, HoLEP performed with either 1) 22Fr sheath set or 2) 28Fr sheath set. After HoLEP, data will be analyzed using chi-square test for incontinence vs no incontinence between 22Fr and 28Fr groups at 1 week, 4 weeks and 12 weeks post operatively

HoLEP will be performed per standard clinical care with the instruments assigned at randomization - 22Fr or 28Fr.

HoLEP will be performed per standard clinical care with the instruments assigned at randomization - 22Fr or 28Fr.

Assessing differences in HoLEP outcomes in smaller 22Fr instruments compared to our standard 28Fr sheaths.

Measuring rates of immediate urinary incontinence or complications post-operation HoLEP using the Michigan Incontinence System Index (M-ISI) survey.

Inclusion Criteria:• Age >18 years old Undergoing HoLEP for benign prostatic enlargement Eligible for same day catheter removal Exclusion Criteria: Age < 18 years old Existing stress or urge urinary incontinence Planned overnight admission or overnight catheterization