ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Does size matter? Comparison of miniaturized (22 Fr) versus standard (26 Fr) instruments in pulsed thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate.
Article in World journal of urology, 2026. 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.
- Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate with pulsed Thulium:YAG generators: a systematic review.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Perioperative outcomes and prevalence of urethral strictures during surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia: results from the GRAND study.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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnatomic enucleation of the prostate is increasingly performed worldwide. While 26-Fr instruments are commonly used, miniaturized devices have been associated with fewer complications and improved recovery without compromising efficiency. We compared intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between 22-Fr and 26-Fr instruments in pulsed Thulium:YAG anatomic enucleation.
methodsA total of 150 patients who underwent pulsed Thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate between December 2024 and July 2025 were prospectively enrolled. MiLEP was performed in 70 patients, while standard AEEP was performed in 80. The primary endpoint was intraoperative efficiency, and secondary endpoints were postoperative complications and functional recovery, comparing miniaturized with standard instruments.
resultsThe MiLEP group had a smaller median prostate volume (50.5 vs. 88 mL, p < 0.001) and shorter enucleation time (19 vs. 25 min, p < 0.001), although enucleation efficiency was higher in the standard group (3.6 vs. 2.7 g/min, p < 0.001). Irrigation volume was lower (13.5 vs. 21 L, p < 0.001), and no intraoperative urethrotomy/meatotomy was required in the MiLEP group compared with 10 patients (12.5%) in the standard group (p = 0.002). At 1 month, urethral stricture was identified in 1 (1.4%) MiLEP and 3 (3.8%) standard patients (p = 0.379), whereas incontinence occurred in 3 (4.3%) and 4 (5.0%), respectively (p = 0.836).
conclusionsMiLEP with pulsed Thulium:YAG laser represents an effective modality for anatomic enucleation of the prostate. It was associated with comparable intraoperative efficiency and favorable postoperative functional outcomes compared to standard resectoscope size. Our findings suggest that MiLEP may be a suitable option for selected patients, particularly those with lower urethral compliance and smaller prostate volume.
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.