Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35237038›Full record

ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2022

Comparison of Outcome and Quality of Life Between Thulium Laser (Vela

Yu-Ting Chen, Chen-Pang Hou, Horng-Heng Juang, Yu-Hsiang Lin, Pei-Shan Yang, Phei-Lang Chang, Chien-Lun Chen, Shu-Chuan Weng, Ke-Hung Tsui

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Yu-Ting Chen *Department of Urology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-1440-2516
Chen-Pang Hou *Department of Urology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Horng-Heng JuangDepartment of Urology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-8524-8253
Yu-Hsiang LinDepartment of Urology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Pei-Shan YangDepartment of Urology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Phei-Lang ChangDepartment of Urology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Chien-Lun ChenDepartment of Urology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-0322-4072
Shu-Chuan WengHealth and Management, Yuanpei University of Medical Technology, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Ke-Hung TsuiDepartment of Urology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-1121-4402

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeIn this study, we compared patient outcomes between the 120-W thulium laser (Vela™XL) prostate enucleation (ThuLEP) and bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate (B-TUEP) techniques.

methodsWe excluded patients with concomitant prostate cancer and bladder cancer and prospectively analyzed patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) who underwent ThuLEP and B-TUEP from October 2018 to January 2021 in our institution. Patients' demographics, comorbidities, prostate volumes, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, and International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) were recorded. Perioperative outcomes including intraoperative blood loss, prostate resection percentage of the transition zone, postoperative pain score (numeric rating scale, NRS), complications, changes in postoperative uroflowmetry parameters, IPSS, and the rate of reuse of BPH medications were also evaluated.

resultsThe data of a total of 111 patients (ThuLEP: 49, B-TUEP: 62) met the inclusion criteria were collected and analyzed prospectively. Our results revealed no significant differences between ThuLEP and B-TUEP in terms of operation time, prostate tissue enucleated, and days of hospitalization. However, patients in the ThuLEP group reported less pain after surgery than those in the B-TUEP group, and a higher proportion of patients in the B-TUEP group returned to the emergency department due to complications within one month postoperatively, with hematuria being the main cause. No significant differences were observed between the groups in changes in uroflowmetry parameters and IPSS at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively.

conclusionThe efficacy of ThuLEP was comparable to that of B-TUEP in terms of maximal flow rate, voiding volume, IPSS, and quality of life. ThuLEP also had several advantages over B-TUEP, including less blood loss and less postoperative pain. Therefore, ThuLEP can be considered a treatment of choice for BPH/bladder outlet obstruction, specifically for patients with a bleeding tendency and fear of pain.

Indexed as

laserprostateprostatectomyprostatic hyperplasiaquality

Identifiers

PMID35237038
PMCPMC8885124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.