Physician for Urolift

Clinical Results

Clinical results from multiple peer-reviewed studies demonstrate that treatment with the UroLift® System offers rapid and significant improvement in lower urinary tract symptoms and flow through a less invasive procedure that uniquely preserves sexual function and avoids complications typically associated with other BPH procedures. Symptom, flow and quality of life improvements can be durable to at least 3 years.1

Benefits of the UroLift® System treatment include:

  • Straightforward Procedure
  • Local or General Anaesthesia
  • Immediate, Visible Results
  • Rapid Symptom Relief
  • Preservation of Sexual Function
  • Durable Results

Preservation of Sexual Function

An important and unique feature of treatment with the UroLift System is the preservation of sexual function. In each of the published studies, including the large randomised study, there has been preservation of ejaculation. This compares favourably to the 40%-80% rate of retrograde/anejaculation published for TURP and laser and the up to 10% rate published for medications.11-15 Erectile function has also been preserved compared to the widely published 10% erectile problem rate associated with TURP and laser.11-17 

Significant Improvements without Significant Downsides

benefitcompar-chart 2

The UroLift System treatment has consistently demonstrated an excellent safety profile. Bleeding is much less than TURP, with a 0% transfusion rate to date for UroLift vs. 5%-7% for TURP. Other important advantages are the ability to offer the UroLift System treatment using only local anaesthesia, as well as a patient’s rapid return to work and preoperative activity.3,4,7  Patients on average missed only 3 days work, and returned to preoperative activity levels by 6 days.7  This compares favourably to several weeks of recovery associated with TURP, laser, and other BPH procedures.11-15

Adverse effects of UroLift System treatment are predominantly mild to moderate transurethral side effects (e.g. dysuria, hematuria, pelvic discomfort, urgency) that typically resolve within two to four weeks. Within the first postoperative year, there has been no incidence of transfusion, bladder neck contracture or stress incontinence reported in any study of the UroLift System.1-10  These are common complications of both TURP and laser treatments.11-15 

The efficacy of the UroLift® System has been demonstrated in numerous studies, including a randomised blinded study conducted primarily in the US,1,2,3  a crossover study,4 a European retrospective registry5 and open label studies conducted in the USA, UK, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Italy, France and Australia.6,7,8,9,10 

IPSS Improvement

Improvement in LUTS, as seen through average reduction in IPSS (International Prostate Symptom Score), has been consistent across the various studies, showing rapid relief within two weeks across all studies and sustained effect through three years [Figure 1]. Over 600 patient-years of data have been presented in peer-reviewed publications to date.


Figure 1: International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) improvement as a result of UroLift System treatment in four major studies.

Flow Rate Improvement

In addition to improving LUTS, the UroLift System has demonstrated significant average improvement in peak urinary flow rate (Qmax) improving 4.2 mL/sec by 3 months and sustained to 3 years, p<0.001.1,2,3 

Quality of Life Improvement

Quality of life also improved significantly, with the IPSS QOL and BPH Impact Index maintaining 49% and 53% improvements, respectively at 3 years, p<0.0011 

Low Retreatment Rate

The rate of surgical intervention for failure to cure remains low for a BPH procedure, with approximately 10% over 3 years.1,2,3,4,5,6  Over the first postoperative year, no additional surgical intervention has been required for complications typically associated with other BPH procedures, such as bladder neck contracture, stricture, transfusion or stress incontinence.

 Screen Shot 2015-08-20 at 11.19.12 AM


1.  Roehrborn, CG, et al. Can J Urology 2015
2. Roehrborn CG, et al. Urology Practice 2015
3. Roehrborn CG, et al. J Urol 2013

4. Cantwell AL, et al. BJUI 2013
5. McNicholas TA, et al. Eur Urol 2013
6. Chin PT, et al. Urology 2012
7. Shore N, et al. Can J Urology 2014
8. Garrido Abad P, et al. Urol. 2013
9. Woo HH, et al. BJU Int 2011
10. Delongchamps NB, et al. Progres en urologie 2012
11. Oelke M et al. EAU 2011
12. McVary KT et al. AUA Guidelines 2010
13. Roehrborn CG et al. AUA Guidelines 2003
14. Stucki P, et al. AUA 2013 Meeting
15. Elshal AM, et al. AUA 2013 Meeting
16. McVary KT, et al. J Sex Med 2014
17. Woo HH, et al. J Sex Med 2012