ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026
En-bloc and non-en-bloc techniques for thulium laser enucleation of the prostate: a comparative study of surgical outcomes.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare surgical outcomes between the en-bloc and non-en-bloc techniques of thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) in patients with different prostate volumes (PV).
methodsWe reviewed patients treated with ThuLEP for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) at Peking University First Hospital from January 2020 to December 2022. Patients were categorized into en-bloc and non-en-bloc (the two-lobe and three-lobe techniques) according to enucleation techniques. Baseline characteristics, peri-operative and post-operative outcomes were evaluated. Subgroup analysis were conducted based on prostate volume (PV < 60 ml, 60 ≤ PV < 80 ml, and PV ≥ 80 ml). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce confounding.
resultsA total of 540 patients were included with 196 patients undergoing en-bloc enucleation and 344 patients undergoing non-en-bloc enucleation. The baseline characteristics between the two groups were similar. The en-bloc technique demonstrated reduced operation time (median: 59.0 vs. 78.0 min, P < 0.001) and increased operation efficiency (median: 0.84 vs. 0.63 g/min, P < 0.001) compared to the non-en-bloc techniques, with similar post-operative complication rates (6.1% vs. 4.7%, P = 0.458). Sub-group analysis based on prostate volume revealed that the en-bloc technique resulted in decreased operation time and improved operation efficiency for patients with PV > 80 ml and between 60 and 80 ml. However, no significant difference was observed between en-bloc and non-en-bloc techniques for patients with PV ≤ 60 ml.
conclusionsIn patients with PV > 60 ml, the en-bloc technique is advantageous in operation time and efficiency compared to non-en-bloc techniques. For those with PV < 60 ml, the en-bloc and non-en-bloc techniques exhibit similar operation time and efficiency.
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.