Scoping review shows optilume reduces recurrence and improves outcomes in patients with BPH and urethral stricture, suggesting its promising role in urology.
Introduction Optilume and Optilume BPH, a minimally invasive drug-coated balloon (DCB) combining mechanical dilation with paclitaxel delivery, offers a novel approach for treating urethral strictures and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) respectively. This scoping review summarizes current evidence on their efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes to evaluate their role in reducing recurrence and improving patient-reported and functional outcomes. Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search (Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus) until March 2025 identified 287 studies. Eligibility followed PICOS criteria, excluding non-English articles, reviews, and case reports. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2 and MINORS tools. Data extraction focused on anatomical success, symptom improvement, complications, and retreatment rates. This review was registered at https://osf.io/vf4dw . Results After screening, 20 studies met inclusion criteria: 2 preclinical animal studies, 12 clinical studies on urethral strictures, and 6 on BPH. For urethral strictures, the ROBUST trials demonstrated 71.7% freedom from reintervention at 5 years, with sustained improvements in peak flow rate (Qmax: 5.0 to 19.9 mL/s) and IPSS (25.2 to 7.2). In BPH, the PINNACLE trial reported a 67.5% responder rate (≥ 30% IPSS improvement) at 2 years, with IPSS reduced from 23.4 to 11.0. Qmax improved from 8.9 to 19.0 mL/s, and sexual function (IIEF scores) remained stable. Safety profiles were favorable, with transient hematuria (15–39.8%) and no severe complications. Cost analyses indicated potential savings due to reduced retreatment. Conclusion Optilume provides significant symptom relief for BPH and urethral strictures, with low recurrence rates and preserved sexual function. Its minimally invasive nature, combined with targeted drug delivery, positions it as a promising alternative to traditional surgeries. Further research is needed to expand indications and validate long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness across diverse populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gauhar et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: