ReviewWorld journal of urology2021
Reasons for new MIS. Let's be fair: iTIND, Urolift and Rezūm.
Review in World journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Minimally invasive surgical techniques (MISTs) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: results from a Delphi consensus project to shed light on controversial topics.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Role of Rezum in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia: A review of the literature.Turkish journal of urology · 2021Article
- Head-to-head comparison of prostatic urethral lift and water vapor thermal therapy for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: a real-life study.International urology and nephrology · 2021Article
- TURPxit or not: contemporary management options for benign prostatic obstruction.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- TURPxit or not: the guidelines perspective-Panta Rhei.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo review and discuss the literature regarding iTIND, Urolift and Rezūm and investigate the precise clinical indications of all three different approaches for their application in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe PubMed-Medline and Cochrane Library databases were screened to identify recent English literature relevant to iTIND, Urolift and Rezūm therapies. The surgical technique and clinical results for each approach were summarized narratively.
resultsiTIND, Urolift and Rezūm are safe and effective minimally invasive procedures for the symptomatic relief of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to BPH. iTIND requires the results of ongoing prospective studies, a long-term follow-up and a comparison against a reference technique to confirm the generalizability of the first pivotal study. Urolift provides symptomatic relief but the improvements are inferior to TURP at 24 months and long-term retreatments have not been evaluated. Rezūm requires randomized controlled trials against a reference technique to confirm the first promising clinical results. However, clinical evidence from prospective clinical trials demonstrates the efficacy and safety of these procedures in patients with small- and medium-sized prostates.
conclusionsAlthough iTIND, Urolift, and Rezūm cannot be applied to all bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) cases resulting from BPH, they provide a safe alternative for carefully selected patients who desire symptom relief and preservation of erectile and ejaculatory function without the potential morbidity of more invasive procedures.
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.