Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37980297›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of urology2023

Comparison of EEP and TURP long-term outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Andrey Morozov, Mark Taratkin, Anastasia Shpikina, Yaron Ehrlich, Jonathan McFarland, Alim Dymov, Vasiliy Kozlov, Harun Fajkovic, Juan Gomez Rivas, Lukas Lusuardi and 4 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

14 authors at 7 institutions in 7 countries.

Andrey MorozovInstitute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.
Mark TaratkinInstitute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.
Anastasia ShpikinaInstitute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.
Yaron EhrlichDivision of Urology, Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikva, Israel.
Jonathan McFarlandInstitute of Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.
Alim DymovInstitute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.
Vasiliy KozlovDepartment of Public Health and Healthcare, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia.
Harun FajkovicKarl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology, Vienna, Austria.
Juan Gomez RivasDepartment of Urology, Clinico San Carlos University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Lukas LusuardiDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Salzburg, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Jeremy Yuen-Chun TeohS.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China.
Thomas HerrmannDepartment of Urology, Spital Thurgau AG, Pfaffenholzstrasse 4, 8501, Frauenfeld, Switzerland.
Jack BanielDivision of Urology, Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikva, Israel.
Dmitry EnikeevInstitute for Urology and Reproductive Health, Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia. dvenikeev@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7169-2209
Sechenov University · RUTel Aviv University · ILChinese University of Hong Kong · HKHospital Clínico San Carlos · ESKarl Landsteiner Society · ATMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DEParacelsus Medical University · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare long-term reoperation rate and functional outcomes between EEP (endoscopic enucleation of the prostate) and TURP (transurethral resection of the prostate). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature review of Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted with primary outcome assessed being reoperation rate and secondary outcomes after a long term (> 3 years) being functional outcomes or related values (prostate volume, PSA level, etc.). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Five studies were found with long-term follow-up 4-7 years. EEP reoperation rate ranged from 0 to 1.27%, while from 1.7 to 17.6% for TURP. Meta-analysis showed significantly lower OR for EEP, 0.27 (95% CI 0.24-0.31), with notable homogeneity of the results, I

conclusionEEP had a significantly lower reoperation rate and better functional outcomes (Q

Indexed as

Prostatic HyperplasiaTransurethral Resection of ProstateHumansMaleProstate-Specific AntigenQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeProstate-Specific AntigenBenign prostate hyperplasiaProstate enucleationSystematic reviewTransurethral prostate resection

Identifiers

PMID37980297
OpenAlexW4388792390

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.