ArticleCureus2025
One-Year Clinical Outcomes of Water Vapor Thermal Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Single-Center Experience of 52 Patients.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Association between volume per injection and treatment failure after water vapor thermal therapy.BMC 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) has emerged as a minimally invasive surgical therapy (MIST) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) management. While international studies have confirmed its safety and efficacy, real-world data from Japanese outpatient clinics remain scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the one-year clinical outcomes of WVTT performed in a single urology clinic, representing the first Japanese single-center report describing one-year clinical outcomes of outpatient WVTT. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Mizuhodai Urology, including 52 patients who underwent WVTT between March 2023 and September 2024. Baseline and follow-up assessments at one, three, six, and 12 months included quality of life (QOL, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS)-QOL), prostate volume (PV), and postvoid residual (PVR) volume. Adverse events (AEs) were classified using the Clavien-Dindo system. Risk factors for the restart of BPH medication and failure of the first trial of void (TOV) were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. Results Significant improvements in QOL, PV, and PVR were maintained throughout the 12-month follow-up period. All procedures were completed as day-case interventions under spinal anesthesia, with a median operative time of 3 min and a mean hospitalization duration of 259 min. Catheter removal was achieved in all patients, although the first TOV failed in seven cases. Restart of BPH medication was required in seven patients after a median of 339 days. Multivariate analysis identified PV ≥60 mL as a risk factor for medication restart and PV ≥70 mL for first TOV failure. AEs occurred in six patients within 14 days, all grade I-II, with no grade ≥III events. Conclusion Clinic-based WVTT was safe and effective for BPH management, with sustained improvement in QOL, PV, and PVR at one year. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first Japanese study reporting one-year outcomes of WVTT. These results support its feasibility as a minimally invasive, office-based therapy while underscoring the importance of patient selection in larger prostates.
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.