ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology
Current and emerging mechanical minimally invasive therapies for benign prostatic obstruction.
Review in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bladder drainage using the coreflow prostatic stent after REZUM therapy.World journal of urology · 2026Trial
- The EXPANDER-1 trial: introduction of the novel Urocross™ Expander System for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2022Trial
- Treatment Regret in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Treatments for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Surgical treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction: an analysis and meta-synthesis of available guidelines.BMC urology · 2025Review
- Recent Advancements in Prostate Catheters and Stents for Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.Current urology reports · 2024Review
- A scoping review of office-based prostatic stents: past, present, and future of true minimally invasive treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Characterization of the histological response to the Butterfly Prostatic Retraction Device in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Office-Based Procedures for BPH.Current urology reports · 2021Review
- Reasons for new MIS. Let's be fair: iTIND, Urolift and Rezūm.World journal of urology · 2021Review
- Urinary and sexual function after treatment with temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in men with LUTS: 6-month interim results of the MT-06-study.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Interventional therapy in benign conditions of the prostate.Der Radiologe · 2020Review
- An Update on Minimally Invasive Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Techniques, Risks, and Efficacy.The world journal of men's health · 2020Review
- The Complex Relationship Between Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Sexual Health.Current urology reports · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered the 'gold standard' for the surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). However, during recent years TURP has been challenged by several minimally invasive therapies (MITs). The reasons for the development of these MITs are the need for anesthesia and the rather unchanged morbidity of TURP, including ejaculation disorders. Mechanical MITs may represent an attractive option for treating LUTS/BPO by using mechanical forces to maintain urethral patency without cutting, ablating, heating or removing prostatic tissue. The present paper provides an update on currently available mechanical devices for the treatment of LUTS/BPO including the prostatic urethral lift (PUL), the temporary implantable nitinol device, and new intraprostatic implants. It analyzes the evidence for their safety, tolerability, and efficacy in clinical practice and aims to define those subpopulations of patients who will benefit from these MITs. It is obvious that there is a wide variation in the degree of mature of the available mechanical MITs. Time and high-quality long-term studies will decide which of these therapies will be accepted by patients and urologists. At the moment, PUL is claiming its position in the armamentarium of BPO treatment.
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.