Aquablation as salvage therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an international multicentre study
13 affiliations
- 1Faculty of Medicine University of Montreal Montreal QC Canada
- 2Division of Urology University of Montreal Montreal QC Canada
- 3Division of Urology McGill University Montreal QC Canada
- 4Faculty of Medicine McGill University Montreal QC Canada
- 5Faculty of Medicine University of Sherbrooke Sherbrooke QC Canada
- 6Division of Urology University of Vermont Medical Center Burlington VT USA
- 7Faculty of Medicine University of Laval Quebec City QC Canada
- 8Division of Urology University of Chicago Chicago IL USA
- 9Division of Urology Potomac Urology Center National Harbor MD USA
- 10Division of Urology NorthShore University Health System Evanston IL USA
- 11Division of Urology University Health Network Toronto ON Canada
- 12Urology Clinic Hospital Cruz Vermelha Lisbon Portugal
- 13Division of Urology BPH Canada Prostate Surgical Institute Montreal QC Canada
Abstract
Objective: Our objective was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of Aquablation® as a salvage therapy in patients who underwent prior intervention for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analysed 1887 consecutive men from the International Collaborative Aquablation Research Urology Society database between 2018 and 2024 who underwent Aquablation at one of four international centres. The cohort was divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of previous BPH intervention. Baseline characteristics, clinical and functional outcomes, and complication rates were compared between the two groups using analysis of variance and Kruskal–Wallis tests. Finally, exploratory sub‐analyses were performed in the salvage therapy group based on the type of prior BPH intervention.
Results: Among the study population of 1887 men, 109 (5.8%) patients had undergone prior BPH intervention, and the remaining 1778 (94.2%) patients served as a control cohort. Prostate volumes were similar between both groups (82.3 vs 78.0 mL; P = 0.18). There were no significant differences in perioperative complications, 30‐day readmission rates, surgical retreatment rates, or sexual function outcome scores (all P > 0.05). There were also similar improvements in maximum urinary flow rates, post‐void residuals, International Prostate Symptom Scores, and quality of life scores (all P > 0.05). When comparing outcomes based on the type of prior BPH intervention, there were no differences in terms of operative time, prostate volumes, presence of median lobe, or complication rates.
Conclusion: We observed no statistically significant differences in safety or effectiveness for Aquablation as a salvage therapy for recurrent lower urinary tract symptoms after BPH intervention. Aquablation should be offered to men for whom prior procedures have failed and who want to preserve continence and sexual function.
Related
- Two-dimensional computational fluid dynamics study of urine flow in the prostatic fossa after benign prostatic hyperplasia surgery: a single-patient model
- Intake of foods containing phytochemicals is correlated with benign prostatic hyperplasia development: a long-term follow-up study
- Cumulative average glucose–lipid metabolic obesity index associates with benign prostatic hyperplasia incidence in Chinese middle-aged and older men
- Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia
- Multiparametric MRI characterization of giant benign prostatic hyperplasia with an intraprostatic calculus: Operative and histopathologic correlation in a case report
BibTeX
@article{leathead2026aquablation,
title = {{Aquablation as salvage therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an international multicentre study}},
author = {Anouk Leathead and Nick Lee and Adel Arezki and David Bouhadana and Liam Murad and Tarek Benzouak and Iman Sadri and Rosie Foucault and Aalya Hamouda and Jeffrey Sioufi and Ilan Ohana and Joshua Cabral and Margaret Gannon and Gregory Raster and David Nusbaum and Abdulla Alameeri and John Klein and Inderjit Singh and James Kearns and Shawn Marhamati and Alexander Glaser and Brian Helfand and Dean Elterman and Tiago Rodrigues and Kevin C. Zorn},
journal = {Bju International},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1111/bju.70481},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.70481},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Aquablation as salvage therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an international multicentre study
AU - Anouk Leathead
AU - Nick Lee
AU - Adel Arezki
AU - David Bouhadana
AU - Liam Murad
AU - Tarek Benzouak
AU - Iman Sadri
AU - Rosie Foucault
AU - Aalya Hamouda
AU - Jeffrey Sioufi
AU - Ilan Ohana
AU - Joshua Cabral
AU - Margaret Gannon
AU - Gregory Raster
AU - David Nusbaum
AU - Abdulla Alameeri
AU - John Klein
AU - Inderjit Singh
AU - James Kearns
AU - Shawn Marhamati
AU - Alexander Glaser
AU - Brian Helfand
AU - Dean Elterman
AU - Tiago Rodrigues
AU - Kevin C. Zorn
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/07
JO - Bju International
DO - 10.1111/bju.70481
UR - https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.70481
AB - Objective: Our objective was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of Aquablation® as a salvage therapy in patients who underwent prior intervention for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analysed 1887 consecutive men from the International Collaborative Aquablation Research Urology Society database between 2018 and 2024 who underwent Aquablation at one of four international centres. The cohort was divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of previous BPH intervention. Baseline characteristics, clinical and functional outcomes, and complication rates were compared between the two groups using analysis of variance and Kruskal–Wallis tests. Finally, exploratory sub‐analyses were performed in the salvage therapy group based on the type of prior BPH intervention. Results: Among the study population of 1887 men, 109 (5.8%) patients had undergone prior BPH intervention, and the remaining 1778 (94.2%) patients served as a control cohort. Prostate volumes were similar between both groups (82.3 vs 78.0 mL; P = 0.18). There were no significant differences in perioperative complications, 30‐day readmission rates, surgical retreatment rates, or sexual function outcome scores (all P > 0.05). There were also similar improvements in maximum urinary flow rates, post‐void residuals, International Prostate Symptom Scores, and quality of life scores (all P > 0.05). When comparing outcomes based on the type of prior BPH intervention, there were no differences in terms of operative time, prostate volumes, presence of median lobe, or complication rates. Conclusion: We observed no statistically significant differences in safety or effectiveness for Aquablation as a salvage therapy for recurrent lower urinary tract symptoms after BPH intervention. Aquablation should be offered to men for whom prior procedures have failed and who want to preserve continence and sexual function.
SN - 1464-4096
SN - 1464-410X
ER -