Observational studyAbdominal radiology (New York)2021
Retrospective observation of the efficacy and safety of prostatic artery embolization combined with transurethral resection of the prostate and simple transurethral resection of the prostate in the treatment of large (> 100 mL) benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Observational study in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo retrospectively compare the efficacy and safety of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) combined with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and simple TURP in treating large (> 100 mL) benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 13 and 17 patients with large BPH who underwent TURP and PAE + TURP, respectively, from January 2016 to January 2020. The changes in various indices before and after surgery were compared between the two groups.
resultsIn the PAE + TURP group, the operation time (OT), intraoperative blood loss (BL), postoperative bladder flushing time (PBFT), and postoperative catheter retention time (PCRT) were lower, and the speed of the excised lesion (SEL) was higher than that in the TURP group (P < 0.05). Following-up for 12 months, the prostatic volume (PV), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual volume (PVR), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) score, total prostate-specific antigen (T-PSA), and free prostate-specific antigen (F-PSA) in each group improved as compared to before the surgery (P < 0.05), and the above improved indicators, IPSS ratio, and obstructive symptoms in the PAE + TURP group were higher than those in the TURP group (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications in the PAE + TURP group was lower than that in the TURP group. We obtained the pathological picture of a prostate biopsy after PAE for the first time.
conclusionCompared to TURP alone, PAE + TURP should be promoted, because of its greater efficacy and safety in treating large BPH and fewer post-surgical complications.
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.