ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
Simulation and quantitative evaluation of three surgical techniques of endoscopic enucleation of prostate on a realistic phantom model.
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.
- Simulation based training versus mentorship in the initial learning curve of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) surgery. The effects of simulation training on surgical success, complication rates, and surgeon workload: a prospective comparative study.World 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of three different AEEP techniques on the training performance of novices using a realistic hydrogel prostate phantom model. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe experimental setup utilized realistic prostate phantom model provided by the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Germany. For the enucleation, we utilized a new solid-state pulsed thulium laser (Thulio®, Dornier MedTech, Weßling, Germany). We explored three different AEEP techniques-bilobar, trilobar, and en-bloc-repeated ten times each, totaling 30 procedures.
resultsMedian enucleation time was 9.5 min (range: 6-16), median laser time was 4.29 min (3.21-6.34), median total energy used was 25.8 kJ (19.4-38.1), and median number of laser pulses was 12.8 thousand (9.7-17). There were no significant differences in operation time, laser time, pulses, or joules among the en-bloc, two-lobe, and three-lobe techniques (p = 0.113, 0.143, 0.148, 0.141 respectively). Ultrasound evaluations showed the one-lobe technique to be superior in accuracy, smoothness, and circularity (p = 0.0002, 0.012, 0.00005 respectively) (Figs. 9, 10, 11), despite having the highest perforation rate, which was not statistically significant compared to other techniques (p = 1.4). The one-lobe technique's higher accuracy may increase the risk of perforation. In contrast, the three-lobe technique had the lowest perforation rate and removal efficiency due to its lower accuracy.
conclusionThe en-bloc, bilobar, and trilobar enucleation techniques exhibited comparable operation times. The one-lobe method emerged as superior in terms of accuracy, smoothness, and circularity. However, it also presented the highest rate of perforation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39699638What 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.