Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28791231›Full record

ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2017

Medium-term efficacy of the prostatic urethral lift.

Peter Chin, Peter Robertson

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Peter ChinSouth Coast Urology, No. 1 Suttor place, Figtree 2525, New South Wales, Australia.
Peter RobertsonSouth Coast Urology, No. 1 Suttor place, Figtree 2525, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treatment options for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia have traditionally revolved around pharmacotherapy or invasive surgery, both of which can negatively impact quality of life (QoL). The quest for a suitable minimally invasive surgical therapy as an alternative to long-term medication or conventional surgery, has seen the development of heat-based therapies, most of which have been dismissed because of post-operative complications and unacceptable re-treatment rates. During the late 1980s and 1990s, mechanical approaches such as transurethral balloon dilation and prostatic urethral stenting were investigated; however, re-treatment rates, encrustation and unacceptable migration rate of stents saw these options fall into disuse. In 2004, a new non-thermal, mechanical approach-the Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL; UroLift

Indexed as

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)minimally invasive surgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID28791231
PMCPMC5522795
OpenAlexW2613777000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.