ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2014
Primary results of transurethral prostate ethanol injection.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMinimally invasive methods, especially the novel techniques, gain more and more popularity in benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) treatment. Transurethral ethanol injection is one of these novel methods as it is easy to apply for BPH treatment and quite successful. The present study evaluates the results of a single-year transurethral ethanol injection prostate (TUEP) follow-up employed for the first time in our country. MATERIALS AND
methodsFifty-two patients with lower urinary tract symptoms underwent TUEP. It was performed in ten patients under local anesthesia and in 42 patients under sedation. Dehydrated ethanol with a concentration of 95-98 % was injected using transurethral approach with a rigid cystoscope. Forty-two patients were followed for 1 year.
resultsAt the end of the first year, the average patients' IPSS scores decreased from 22.6 to 12.8 and prostate volume from 49.5 to 38.8 cc. Q-average increased from 3.3 to 7.1 ml/s and Qmax from 6.4 to 9.7 ml/s. Residual urine decreased from 160.1 ml to 68 cc. There were not any dire postoperative complications. In 77.8 % of the patients, TUEP succeeded. In 13.8 % of the patients, alternative treatment methods were to be employed.
conclusionTUEP, an effective minimally invasive treatment option, can be performed with medically high-risk BPH patients under regional anesthesia. The procedure is easy, inexpensive, safe, and rapid to us. Yet, long-term and multi-centered studies with larger patient series are needed to define further benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.