ArticleAsian journal of urology2025
Mechanical dissection-based enucleation versus laser energy-based enucleation during thulium laser enucleation of a large prostate: A prospective randomized analysis.
Article in Asian journal of urology, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study attempted to compare the laser energy-based enucleation with the mechanical dissection-based enucleation regarding the enucleation efficiency and the functional outcomes. Methods: This was a prospective multicenter study including patients with a prostate exceeding 80 g. Thulium laser enucleation of the prostate was conducted using a high-power thulium laser either through mechanical dissection-based enucleation (Group A) or through laser energy-based enucleation (Group B) according to the preoperative randomization. In Group A, the resectoscope sheath beak was used to liberate the prostate adenoma and laser energy was reserved for adhesions and for hemostasis. In Group B, laser energy was implemented throughout the procedure. Results: Groups A and B included 68 and 71 patients, respectively, for analysis. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) enucleation time was shorter in Group A than in Group B (55.2 [SD 9.4] min Conclusion: Both mechanical dissection-based and laser energy-based thulium laser enucleation of the prostate are safe and feasible for successful reduction of bladder outlet resistance. The mechanical dissection-based enucleation technique provides higher enucleation efficiency with lower postoperative transient storage symptoms.
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.