ArticleBJU international2025
Perioperative complications of focal therapy for prostate cancer: results from the GeRmAn Nationwide inpatient Data (GRAND) study.
Article in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oncological efficacy, functional outcomes and safety of MR-guided ultrasound ablation (MRgFUS/TULSA) for localized prostate cancer: a scoping review.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- Irreversible electroporation in focal therapy for prostate cancer: current status and future directions.Prostate international · 2026Review
- Advances in focal therapy for prostate cancer: current modalities, outcomes, and future directions.Prostate international · 2026Review
- Peri-operative outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robotic simple prostatectomy.BJU international · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the perioperative complications of the most common focal therapy (FT) modalities for prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe assessed the GeRmAn Nationwide inpatient Data (GRAND) from 2005 to 2023, provided by the Research Data Center of the Federal Bureau of Statistics. We compared perioperative outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), hyperthermia, irreversible electroporation of the prostate, cryotherapy, vascular photodynamic therapy of the prostate (VTP), and transurethral ultrasound ablation, as well as HIFU vs non-HIFU treatments in general. Furthermore, we evaluated the role of concomitant transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) on perioperative complications. Finally, the complication rate of FT was also compared to brachytherapy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
resultsA total of 10 544 underwent FT. Most patients received HIFU (92%). The number of FT cases performed annually has been steadily decreasing. The most prevalent complication (9.6%) was urinary tract infection (HIFU: 10%, hyperthermia: 6.2%, cryotherapy: 6.8%, VTP: 3.9%). Haematuria was observed in 3.6% of all cases. In the multivariable regression, HIFU was associated with higher rates of urinary tract infections (10% vs 5.2%, P < 0.001) but lower rates of haematuria (3.4% vs 5.5%, P < 0.001) and admission to the intensive care unit (0.7% vs 2.2%, P < 0.001) compared to non-HIFU procedures. Concomitant TURP was associated with higher transfusion (P < 0.001), haematuria (P < 0.001), sepsis (P = 0.001), and urinary retention rates (P = 0.03). Most perioperative complications were statistically significantly worse in patients undergoing FT compared to brachytherapy, while most perioperative complications were better after FT vs robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
conclusionsIn the largest epidemiological comparative study on the risk of complications of the most common FT for prostate cancer, we were able to show an overall low risk of perioperative complications.
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.