ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2016
[Long-term outcome after endoscopic enucleation of the prostate : From monopolar enucleation to HoLEP and from HoLEP to EEP].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dual-centre randomized-controlled trial comparing transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using diode laser vs. bipolar plasmakinetic for the treatment of LUTS secondary of benign prostate obstruction: 1-year follow-up results.World journal of urology · 2018Trial
- The prospective evaluation of learning curve of bipolar anatomic endoscopic prostate enucleation (AEEP) with Herrmann's vapoenucleation probe.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Thermal effects of thulium: YAG laser treatment of the prostate-an in vitro study.World journal of urology · 2022Article
- Second generation of temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in men with LUTS: 2 year results of the MT-02-study.World journal of urology · 2020Article
- Aquablation of the prostate: single-center results of a non-selected, consecutive patient cohort.World journal of urology · 2019Article
- [Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2019Article
- Transurethral endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP).World journal of urology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the last 20 years various transurethral endoscopic enucleation techniques (EEP) have been established as a substitute for open prostatectomy (OP) and TURP. Since the 2016 update of the "EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), including Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO)", Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and bipolar enucleation being summarized as anatomical enucleating techniques are proposed as first choice for the surgical management of BPO of large volume prostates.
objectivesThe purpose of this review is to demonstrate the available data on long-term outcomes of current EEP techniques. MATERIALS AND
methodsPubMed/Medline and Scopus were searched using the terms: long term, HoLEP, ThuLEP, ThuVEP, DiLEP, ELEP, GreenlEP, Greenlight enucleation, bipolar enucleation, plasmakinetic enucleation, monopolar enucleation, and transurethral enucleation. Studies with a follow-up ≥48 months were selected.
resultsIn all, 5 randomized controlled trials (2 HoLEP, 2 bipolar enucleation, 1 Thulium laser resection of the prostate in tangerine technique [TmLR-TT]), 3 prospective cohort studies (2 thulium vapoenucleation [ThuVEP], 1 TmLRP-TT), and 2 retrospective studies with large patient cohorts were selected. All EEP were equivalent to OP with regard to effectivity and durability of results. The rate of secondary surgical procedures in HolEP, ThuVEP, bipolar enucleation and tangerine technique (TmLRP-TT) was 0-1.2 % for reTURP, 1.9-3.75 % for urethrotomy, and 0.9-4 % for bladder neck resection. No significant difference in the individual studies was found when compared to OP. For bipolar enucleation vs. TURP long-term results for uroflow, residual urine, and IPSS were significantly better at 60 months for bipolar enucleation. One RCT TmLRP-TT vs. TURP at the 48-month follow-up found no significant difference.
conclusionVarious transurethral EEP can be considered as equally safe and effective anatomical enucleation techniques. All displayed EEPs match the durability of OP. The choice of energy source for EEP seems to be secondary and a function of resources and personal preference of the skilled surgeon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27714414What 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.