ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Functional outcomes and safety profile of thulium: YAG laser enucleation (ThuLEP) versus robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) facing very large (≥ 150 ml) prostates.
Article 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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy vs. laser enucleation of the prostate for large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH, ≥80 mL): a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Performance and safety of Thulium fibre laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP): a comparative study over small, average and large prostate.World 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare outcomes between endoscopic enucleation of the prostate with Thulium: YAG laser (ThuLEP) and robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) in the treatment of prostates ≥ 150 ml. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with benign prostatic obstruction and prostate volume ≥ 150 ml underwent ThuLEP (Group A) versus transvesical RASP (Group B). Operative time, length of stay, catheterization time, haemoglobin drop were recorded. Functional outcomes were evaluated through the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax) and post-void residual (PVR). Complications rate was compared.
results200 patients were treated, 100 for each group with comparable preoperative features. Mean prostate volume was 178.6 ml in Group A vs. 186.3 ml in Group B (p = 0.11). Mean total operative time was 82.7 vs. 66.3 min (p = 0.04), catheterization time 3.5 vs. 7.3 days (p = 0.05), length of stay 2.5 vs. 4.8 days (p = 0.04), haemoglobin drop 0.7 vs. 1.3 g/dl (p = 0.06) after ThuLEP vs. RASP. No differences were observed in mean IPSS, Qmax and PVR. Higher rates of urinary infections (4.0% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.05) and urinary retention (4.0% vs. 9.0%, p = 0.04) occurred after RASP. Higher rates of temporary urgency (12.0% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.03) and urge incontinence (3.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.04) were observed after ThuLEP, with no differences in stress incontinence.
conclusionsThuLEP and RASP in expert hands are equally effective to treat very large prostates (≥ 150 ml) with no significant differences in micturition improvements. Operative time is shorter with RASP. Complication profile is different between the two procedures with no differences in major adverse events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41361597What 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.