Skip to main content

Water Vapor Thermal Therapy with Rezūm Versus Combination Pharmacotherapy for Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms due to Benign Prostatic Obstruction: 1-Yr Results From a Prospective, Multicenter, Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial (VAPEUR-RCT)

In brief

Water-vapor therapy improves urinary symptoms about five points more than meds

At one year, men receiving Rezūm water-vapor thermal therapy had a mean IPSS drop of 10.8 points versus 6.2 points with combination alpha-blocker and 5-alpha-reductase therapy, a difference of roughly five points. Quality of life improved more and surgical retreatment was far less common, although adverse events were slightly more frequent. The data suggest WVTT is a viable non-drug alternative for symptomatic BPO, pending longer-term safety data.

Journal
European urology focus (Q1)
Published
18 August 2026
Study design
Randomized controlled trial
Evidence level
Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
Authors
Sébastien Vincendeau, Evanguelos Xylinas, Marc Fourmarier, Ismael Galliot, Ambroise Salin, Souhil Lebdai, et al.
PMID
42608232
DOI
10.1016/j.euf.2026.08.001

Why clinicians should know about it

  • Picked for Urology (top studies of the week, 23 August 2026): RCT shows WVTT superior symptom relief vs combination drugs

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The VAPEUR randomized controlled trial compared Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) with combination pharmacotherapy (CP; alpha-blockers plus 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors) in sexually active men with symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). METHODS: Overall, 151 men were randomized to WVTT (n = 75) or CP (n = 76). Primary endpoints changed from baseline to 1 yr in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Male Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ) score. Secondary endpoints included surgical/medical treatment for recurring symptoms, ≥4 points IPSS worsening (ΔIPSS ≥4), and catheterization beyond 90 d post-procedure. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: At 1 yr, IPSS improvement was greater with WVTT than CP (mean difference -4.6 points; 97.5% confidence interval [CI] -7.6 to -1.6; p < 0.001), with mean improvements of 10.8 ± 6.8 versus 6.2 ± 7.7 points, respectively. MSHQ scores remained stable with WVTT (+1.1 ± 16.9) and CP (-5.2 ± 16.4). Superiority in preserving sexual function was not demonstrated with multiple imputation. Quality‑of‑life (QoL) improvement was greater with WVTT (-2.7 ± 1.8 vs -1.8 ± 2.0; p = 0.01). WVTT resulted in lower rates of surgical retreatment (1.3% vs 9.2%), ΔIPSS ≥4, (2.7% vs 13%) and post-90 d catheterization (0% vs 1.3%), but higher pharmacological retreatment (12% vs 1.3%; combined: hazard ratio = 0.52, CI 0.25-1.1, p = 0.08). Treatment‑related adverse events (AEs) were more frequent with WVTT (40% vs 28%; serious AEs, 12% vs 1.3%), largely procedure‑related; at 1 yr, 93% were resolved in WVTT versus 60% (25/42) in CP. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: At 1 yr, WVTT provides superior symptom relief and greater QoL improvement versus CP, while preserving sexual function. These findings support WVTT as an effective alternative to CP.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.