ReviewBMC urology2025
Surgical treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction: an analysis and meta-synthesis of available guidelines.
Review in BMC urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- En-bloc HoLEP training and learning curve challenges: a multi-generational survey study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Suprapubic transvesical adenoma resection of the prostate (STAR-P): step-by-step technique.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe increase in minimally invasive treatments (MITs) for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (LUTS/BPO) has diversified surgical options, often outpacing solid evidence. The variety of available treatments, while beneficial, can confound physicians. Clinical guidelines provide direction but often differ due to varied evidence interpretation.
methodsWe have analyzed the available guidelines on the surgical treatment of LUTS/BPO updated within the last three years, focusing on those offering specific procedural recommendations. We compared recommendations, analyzed discrepancies, and developed a consensus algorithm that incorporated all pertinent advice. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Out of 14 guidelines, four met the inclusion criteria. Major challenges were inconsistent nomenclature and a lack of clear recommendations, especially for newer procedures such as Temporary Implantable Nitinol Device (iTIND™), Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE), Robotic Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP), and Water Vapor Thermal Therapy (Rezūm™). Despite these issues, a consensus algorithm could be synthesized. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Guidelines for the treatment of LUTS/BPO present a disparate picture, with consensus mostly on older, well-established procedures due to substantial evidence. Newer interventions display significant variation in guideline recommendations and evidence interpretation. The consensus algorithm created from current guidelines offers a synthesized overview of recommendations, underscoring the need for standardized evidence criteria for guideline recommendations. Our work emphasizes the evolving complexity in LUTS/BPO management, aiming to aid urologists in decision-making and patient counseling by providing a clear and comprehensive tool.
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.