ArticleBMC urology2025
Surgical outcomes of transurethral enucleation with bipolar energy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: single surgeon's initial experience.
Article in BMC urology, 2025. 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.
- Integrated management strategies for benign prostatic hyperplasia.Frontiers in urology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransurethral enucleation with bipolar energy (TUEB) is one of endoscopic enucleation methods for the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Authors investigated initial outcomes of TUEB performed by a single surgeon.
methodsFrom 04/2016 to 06/2021, prospectively collected clinical data of 387 patients who underwent TUEB were retrospectively analyzed. TUEB was performed by transurethral resection in a saline system with a spatula loop (one-lobe enucleation technique). Patients were stratified by surgery period (early vs. late) and evaluated perioperatively.
resultsA total of 387 patients were included in the final analysis. Mean age was 72.4 years and total prostate volume was 73.1 cc as in the whole group. Total procedure time (116.0 vs. 116.8 min, p = 0.863), detailed procedure time (enucleation: 49.2 vs. 46.1 min, p = 0.099; morcellation: 26.5 vs. 23.6 min, p = 0.162) and enucleated tissue weight (26.1 g vs. 27.9 g, p = 0.350) did not differ significantly between groups. However, there were significant differences in enucleated tissue weight per unit time (g/min) (0.52 vs. 0.58, p = 0.037), reoperation rates due to bleeding (9.8% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.002), and conversion to transurethral prostatectomy (TURP) (19.2% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001). At 6 months post-operatively, there were insignificant differences in the rates of de novo stress incontinence (p = 0.188), urethral stricture (p = 0.158), and bladder neck contracture (p = 0.477).
conclusionTUEB is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of BPH, resulting in significant improvements in both subjective and objective symptoms. With increasing surgical experience, efficacy of the procedure has significantly improved in terms of both bleeding complication rates and TURP conversion rates. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.