Trial reportInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
A prospective randomized study comparing bipolar plasmakinetic transurethral resection of the prostate and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: efficacy, sexual function, Quality of Life, and complications.
Trial report in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03936244 (Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Bipolar Plasmakinetic Transurethral Resection of the Prostate With Monopolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Bipolar Plasmakinetic Transurethral Resection of the Prostate With Monopolar Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transurethral resection of the prostate across continents: a meta-analysis evaluating quality of gold standard in the twenty-first century.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- Prevalence and risk factors of incidental prostate cancer in certain surgeries for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyPooled it
- Article
- A propensity score-matched comparison of medium- to long-term outcomes between plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Construction and Evaluation of Nomogram Prediction Model for Urinary Tract Infection After Transurethral Bipolar Plasmakinetic Prostatectomy.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Experience of sexual relationship of patients after radical prostatectomy: a qualitative study.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Efficacy of transurethral plasmakinetic resection of the prostate using a small-caliber resectoscope for benign prostatic hyperplasia with mild urethral stricture.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2024Article
- Clinical efficacy and complications of transurethral resection of the prostate versus plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Effect of hospital, community and home care model on nursing and quality of life of patients after transurethral resection of benign prostatic hyperplasia.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- A decisive year to International Brazilian Journal of Urology.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
- Thulium laser enucleation of prostate versus laparoscopic trans-vesical simple prostatectomy in the treatment of large benign prostatic hyperplasia: head-to-head comparison.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
- Bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate are equally effective and safe in this high quality randomized controled trial.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo generate high-quality data comparing the clinical efficacy and safety profile between monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP) and bipolar plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PK-TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIALS AND
methodsProspective, randomized, single-blinded study conducted in a tertiary-care public institution (Dec/2014-Aug/2016). INCLUSION CRITERIA: prostate of <80g in patients with drug-refractory lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), complications derived from BPH, or both. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: a history of pelvic surgery/radiotherapy, neurogenic bladder dysfunction or documented/suspected prostate carcinoma. Treatment efficacy evaluated at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Efficacy outcomes: international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality-of-life (QoL) score, international index of erectile function-5 (IIEF-5), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine (PVRU) volume, and prostate volume (PV). Complications and sequelae also assessed. Comparisons performed with parametric/non-parametric tests.
resultsOut of the 100 hundred patients, 84 qualified for the analysis (45 M-TURP/39 PK-TURP). No significant differences found in baseline characteristics or operative data, except for a longer operative time in PK-TURP (MD:7.9min; 95%CI:0.13-15.74; p=0.04). No differences found in IPSS, Qmax or PVRU volume. QoL score at 12 months was higher in PK-TURP (MD:0,9points; 95%CI:0.18-1.64; p=0.01). No differences in sexual function, PV, complications or sequelae were found. This study is "rigorous" (Jadad-scale) and has a low risk of bias (Cochrane-Handbook).
conclusionsBased on this controlled trial, there is not significant variation in effectiveness and safety between M-TURP and PK-TURP for the treatment of BPH. The small difference in QoL between PK-TURP and M-TURP at the one-year follow-up is not perceivable by the patients and, therefore, not clinically relevant.
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.