ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
Rezŭm water vaporization therapy versus transurethral resection of the prostate in the management of refractory urine retention: matched pair comparative multicenter experience.
Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Rezum water vapor therapy for benign prostate obstruction with 1-year follow-up: Largest real-world data from Turkey.Central European journal of urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the efficacy of Rezūm with a matched cohort of patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for catheter-dependent urine retention secondary to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH).
methodsA retrospective review was performed for consecutive catheter-dependent patients who underwent Rezūm for BPH. Patients were matched and compared with a similar cohort undergoing TURP, using non-inferiority analysis on propensity score-matched patient pairs. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months by international prostate symptoms score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) index, peak flow rate (Qmax) and postvoid residual urine (PVR).
resultsEighty-one patients undergoing Rezūm were compared with equal number of matched patients who undergoing TURP. Patients undergoing Rezūm experienced significantly shorter operation time (25.5 ± 8.7 vs. 103.4 ± 12.6 min; p < 0.001), lower intraoperative bleeding (2.4% vs. 20.7%, p < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (1.2 ± 0.9 vs. 2.4 ± 1.3 d, p < 0.001) and longer catheter time (12.6 ± 6.0 vs. 2.3 ± 1.2 d, p < 0.001), with no need for transfusion. Successful postoperative voiding was comparable between both arms (90.2% vs. 92.7%, p = 0.78), respectively. Despite patients undergoing TURP had significantly better voiding outcomes after 1 and 3 months, both groups were comparable after six and 12 months in terms of mean IPSS (11.1 ± 6.4 vs. 10.8 ± 3.4, p = 0.71), QoL indices (2.4 ± 1.6 vs. 2.1 ± 2.3, p = 0.33) and Qmax (22.0 ± 7.7 v. 19.8 ± 6.9 ml/sec, p = 0.06).
conclusionThis study supports the safety and efficacy of Rezūm in the management of catheter-dependent patients secondary to BPH, with comparable functional outcomes to TURP. Until a randomized clinical comparison is available, long-term data are crucially recommended to compare the recurrence and reoperation rates.
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.