Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39856398›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of urology2025

Transurethral resection of the prostate across continents: a meta-analysis evaluating quality of gold standard in the twenty-first century.

Joao G Porto, Ansh M Bhatia, Abhishek Bhat, Maria Camila Suarez Arbelaez, Ruben Blachman-Braun, Khushi Shah, Ankur Malpani, Diana Lopategui, Thomas R W Herrmann, Robert Marcovich and 1 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

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

11 authors.

Joao G PortoDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6495-1054
Ansh M BhatiaDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6131-4837
Abhishek BhatDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.
Maria Camila Suarez ArbelaezDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0086-9174
Ruben Blachman-BraunDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9700-0805
Khushi ShahDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2879-3607
Ankur MalpaniDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1498-7443
Diana LopateguiDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8620-9512
Thomas R W HerrmannSpitial Thurgau AG (STGAG), Frauenfeld, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4493-1301
Robert MarcovichDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.
Hemendra N ShahDesai Sethi Urology Institute, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, 1120 NW 14th St #2107, 15th Floor, Miami, FL, 33136, USA. hns35@med.miami.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4273-5502

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare outcomes of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) across different regions worldwide over the past two decades.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials indexed to PubMed that assessed TURP. A total of 102 studies with 8,454 patients were included and grouped by continents: Europe, Asia, Africa, and Others (North America, South America, and Australia). International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), peak flow (Qmax), postvoid residual urine (PVR), PSA levels, prostate volume, and Sexual Health Inventory for Men scores (at 3, 12, and 36 months) were assessed, along with postoperative complications. Heterogeneity across studies was classified as low (I

resultsTURP consistently exhibited significant enhancements in IPSS, Qmax, and PVR across various regions. Notably, PVR demonstrated high heterogeneity (I²=100%). TURP presented low complication rates with TURP syndrome (2%), bleeding (8%), and blood transfusion (6%). However, significant heterogeneity was observed, particularly for clot evacuation (I

conclusionGlobal outcomes of TURP lack a discernible trend. The substantial heterogeneity observed among continents suggests a lack of standardization. Nevertheless, uniform symptomatic improvements among patients still support TURP as the gold-standard surgical treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia, despite variations in its results worldwide.

Indexed as

Prostatic HyperplasiaTransurethral Resection of ProstateHumansMalePostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeBenign prostatic hyperplasiaEnlarged prostateLower urinary tract symptomsTransurethral resection of the prostate

Identifiers

PMID39856398
PMCPMC11761131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.