Observational studyWorld journal of urology2026
Does pulse modulation technology improve endoscopic enucleation of the prostate? Real-world comparison of three contemporary laser platforms in 447 patients.
Observational study 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 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnatomical Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) has emerged as a highly effective surgical treatment for benign prostatic enlargement, with multiple laser platforms now available. This study compares perioperative and early postoperative outcomes across three distinct laser systems.
methodsWe analysed 447 patients who underwent AEEP across seven centres between March and August 2025. Patients were divided into three groups: Group 1 (n = 184) treated with Holmium: YAG laser employing Magneto technology, Group 2 (n = 64) with high-power Holmium: YAG laser, and Group 3 (n = 199) with pulsed Thulium: YAG laser. Perioperative parameters, complications, and three-month functional outcomes were assessed.
resultsGroup 3 demonstrated superior operative efficiency with shortest median total operation time (45 vs. 60 vs. 65 min, p < 0.001) and enucleation time (22 vs. 33 vs. 33 min, p < 0.001). No patients in Group 3 required electrocautery for haemostasis compared to 20.7% in Group 1 and 35.9% in Group 2 (p < 0.001). No patient required blood transfusion. No major complications occurred. Readmission for bleeding requiring manual clot evacuation occurred in 6.2% of Group 2 patients and 0.5% of Group 3 patients, with no cases in Group 1 (p < 0.001). Early and late urinary incontinence was significantly lower in Group 3 versus Groups 1 and 2. All platforms achieved substantial functional improvements at 3-month follow-up. No major complications.
conclusionsWhile all three laser platforms achieved effective surgical outcomes with favourable safety profiles, the pulsed Thulium: YAG and Holmium: YAG lasers with magneto technology were associated with advantages in hemostasis and continence outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41582258What 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.