Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Objective To systematically evaluate the efficiency and safety of different prostate morcellators used during prostate enucleation for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐analyses guidelines. PubMed /Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between October 2012 and May 2025. Studies reporting clinical outcomes of morcellators used during prostate enucleation were included. Primary outcome was morcellation efficiency (g/min). Secondary outcomes included intraoperative complications, device malfunction, and cost when available. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non‐randomised Studies of Interventions ( ROBINS ‐I), RoB 2 tool, and European Association of Urology case‐series criteria. Random‐effects meta‐analyses and multilevel meta‐regression adjusted for prostate volume were conducted. Results A total of 22 studies comprising 5980 patients were included, most undergoing holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. The most frequently evaluated devices were the Piranha™ (Richard Wolf GmbH, Knittlingen, Germany) and Lumenis VersaCut™ (Lumenis Ltd., Yokneam, Israel; 12 and 13 studies, respectively), followed by DrillCut™ (Karl Storz SE 95% CI −4.58 to −0.92 g/min; P = 0.003), with an even greater difference in prostates >70 mL (−4.34 g/min). Bladder mucosal injury was the most frequently reported complication; however, relatively rare across all devices. Meta‐analysis demonstrated a significantly higher risk with VersaCut compared to Piranha (risk ratio 3.22, 95% CI 1.81–5.71), with low heterogeneity. Conclusion This systematic review provides a contemporary clinical benchmark of the efficiency and safety of currently available prostate morcellators. Oscillating blade systems, particularly the Piranha morcellator, demonstrated higher morcellation efficiency and a more favourable safety profile than reciprocating blade devices, with the largest performance differences observed in patients with larger prostates.
Kutchukian et al. (Wed,) studied this question.